Skip to main content

Full text of "Armenian Affairs: A Journal on Armenian Studies"

See other formats




Charles A. Vertanes 

Board of. Editorial Advisers 

Harootiun Asdourian 


Cordoba, Argentina 

Henry A. Atkinson 

Current Affairs 

A. A. Bedikian 

History and Literature 

Zabelle G. Boyajian 

Art and Literature 

London, England 

Lawson p. Chambers 


Washington University 

H. M. Dadourian 

Science and Current Affairs 

Trinity College 
KoREN Der Harootian 


Sirarpie Der Nersessian 

Art and Archeology 

Harvard University 

Frederick L. Fagley 

Current Affairs 

Arsen Goergizian 

Church History and Current Affairs 

Vahan Hagopian 


Vahe Haig 


Archbishop Karekin 

Literature and E^cclesiastical History 
Buenos Aires, Argentina 

Emil Lengyel 

Turkey and the Near East 

New York University 

Bishop Sion Manoogian 

Current History 

Bishop Tiran Nersoyan 

Church History 

Abraham A. Neuman 

Near East History 

Dropsie College for Hebrew and 

Cognate Learning 

Reinhold Niebuhr 

Religion and International Affairs 

Union Theological Seminary 

Peniamin Noorigian 


Ernest Partridge 

Education and Missions 

A. Safrastian 

Archeology and History 
London, England 

Joseph B. Schechtman 

Current History and the Near East 

Robert W. Searle 

Social and Political Affairs 

Moushegh Seropian 

History, Literature and Current Affairs 

Nicosia, Cyprus 

K. Sitae 


Mihrtad Tiryakian 

Philology, Literature and History 

Carl Hermann Voss 

Religion and International Affairs 

Jane S. Wingate 

Folk Literature 

Editorial Associates 

Armine Dikijian 

Harry Haroutunian 


Ed^vard V. Gulbenkian 

Great Britain 

Caro a. Martin 

India, Pakistan, and the Far East 

Hrant S. Rshduni 

Noubar Maxoudian 


Vartan Melkonian 


Armenian Affairs, a quarterly, published by the Armenian National Council of 
America, 144 E. 24th Street, New York 10, N. Y. Subscription, $5.00 per year; single 
issues, $1.50 per copy. 

Authors are responsible for opinions expressed in their articles. Members of the editorial 
advisory board assume responsibility only for opinions expressed in articles signed by them, 
•^^^zoo Copyright 1950. 


Spring, 1950 Vol. I, No. 2 


Appeal of Georg VI [130] 

Frontispiece — 

Georg VIj Catholicos and Patriarch of All the Armenians [1311 

Cyril II, late Patriarch of Jerusalem [1321 

Alice Stone Blackwell, Friend of the Armenian People [1331 

Banquet in Honor of Alice Stone Blackwell, 1903 [1341 

Alice Stone Blackwell — A Symposium Charles A. Vertanes 135 

A Biographical Sketch Maud Wood Park 

Relations with Armenians M. C. Gismegian 

Interest in Armenia's Political Destiny 

A Tribute Samuel A. Eliot 

A Sonnet William Lloyd Garrison, Jr. 

Armenians As I Have Known Them Alice Stone Blackwell 

The Lake of Van (Poem) Raffi 

Notes on the Evolution of Armenia's Architecture Vahan Hagopian 151 

Literary Pilgrimages to Armenia 

From America to Armenia K. Sital 159 

From Moscow to Yerevan A. Arsharuni 166 

A Brief Sketch of Armenian History Vazkene Aykouni 176 


The Comedy of Life — "Uucle Geer" G. Eksoozian 185 

Tribute to Armenians Thomas A. Sparks^ S.T.D. 188 

Theodore Roosevelt and Armenia Ashag Mahdesian 190 


The Internationalization of Jerusalem and the Armenian Patriarchate 193 

Letter Regarding the New Jerusalem Plan 197 

Biographical Sketches 

His Beatitude Cyril II, Arshag Mahdesian, Artak Darbinian, 

and Leon Guerdan A. Meliksetian 199 

Book Reviews 

Country Without Economic Backbone ...i : Emil Lengyel 206 

The Armenian Question in Paris in 1919 C. P. IVES 

Letters to the Editor 210 


Testimony of the Armenian National Council on Genocide : 215 

Bibliography : .-. 223 

Books Received 227 

Illustrated Supplement [229] 

The Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem — 

Serovpe Vardapet Manoukian 


Of the Supreme Patriarch-Catholicos of All the Armenians 

To the long-suffering Armenian people, who have lived through endless series 
of tortures and terrors in the past, there has been no greater desire than long-lasting 
peace. The Armenian Holy Apostolic Church, one of the oldest churches in the 
world, has always prayed for human welfare and the peace of the world. In the 
present complex political situation when humanity faces the nightmare of a world 
war which will demand the sacrifice of new millions, the Armenian Church, faithful 
to her traditional principles, raises her voice in the name of peace and joins whole- 
heartedly in the resolutions passed at the Stockholm session of the World Congress 
of the Friends of Peace. 

Supreme Patriarch-Catholicos of all the Armenians Georg VI 
Supreme Spiritual Council of Echmiadzin 

It was reported by Reuters from London on August 5 that the leaders of the Churches in 
the Soviet Union — Patriarch Alexei of Moscow and all Russia, Patriarch Catholicos Kalistrat 
of all Georgia and Patriarch Catholicos Georg of all Armenia — had conferred in Tbilisi, 
Georgia, when they issued a "peace appeal" to Christians throughout the world. 

The appeal to peace of these Soviet church dignitaries is simply one manifestation of a 
world-wide movement for peace on the part of Christian churches and church leaders. 
The World Council of Churches which met at Geneva in February of this year condemned 
the H-bomb as a "sin against God" and urged the Council's member churches to press their 
national governments for the international control of all weapons of mass destruction. In 
response to this appeal the Fedel^ation of Protestant. Churches of Switzerland voted to 
present to the Swiss Government the text of the World Council's statement on the hydrogen 
bomb, urging it "to use its moral authority" as a neutral power "to remove the menace of 
random mechanized armaments." 

The Council of Kerk en Vrede in Holland, an interconfessional organization, in a recent 
appeal directed^ to the Dutch Nation, urged Christians in the Netherlands to "break free from 
the anti-Christian faith in brute force," and oppose the militarization of their country." 
Similarly the National Synod of the Reformed Church of France at its meeting at Nimes, 
June 2-5, demanded that immediate action be taken urging "the renunciation of the whole 
principle of intangible national sovereignties . . . and complete disarmament" by the various 
Governments and the United Nations, "beginning with bacteriological and atomic weapons." 

The Ecumenical Committee of the Hungarian Protestant Churches in Budapest asked 
that the World Council of Churches call upon the UN and all national governments to 
"prohibit atomic arid bacterial warfare at once" and to "start negotiations to solve all inter- 
national controversies as well as to achieve general disarmament." Memorial services were 
held to the same end in churches in the United States and in other countries throughout 
the world on the fifth anniversary of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. 

A group of Roman Catholic personalities and clergymen in France, including Abbe 
Jean Boulier, also issued a statement in which they expressed approval "of all efforts made 
in every country to develop a will for peace throughout the world and in particular . . . 
of the Stockholm Appeal." The Pope, in an encyclical on July 19, addressed himself to the 
heads of Governments to make every effort for the attainment of a "true peace," for war 
brmgs ' nothmg other than ruins, death and every kind of misery. With the passage of time 
such murderous and inhuman weapons have been introduced and developed that not only 
armies and navies, not only cities, hamlets and villages, not only treasures of religion, or 
art and of culture can be exterminated but even innocent children with their mothers, 'the 
sick and the undefended old people. Everything beautiful, good and holy that the genius 
of man has produced, everything or nearly everything can be annihilated." 



f ■■':> ••■ 


o O 



























. T3 


Js g 


.nH d 










. G 









-Ci P= 










■+J o 
■■-< -i-i 
c« o 













(D ^ 

^ . 
















.2 <^ 









o) o 

(D C3 
5-1 'O 





a d 























o3 -Q 















4h rf 





































"^ S^ 







Alice Stone Blackwell 

A Symposium 
By Charles A. Vertanes 

There was nothing vague or obscure in her thinking. . . . She dwelt 
in no neutral zone. . . . She was well assured that what is morally wrong 
can never be politically right. Courage and confidence were the good 
angels that dwelt with her and through her breathed a benediction 
on us all. 

— Samuel A. Eliot 



T a gathering of distinguished men and women on Thursday, May 11, the 
late Alice Stone Blackwell was honored when her portrait^ was presented to the 
Boston University Women's Council and hung in the Louise Holman Fisk House. 

Tributes were paid this famous woman graduate of Boston University by 
Mrs. Everett O. Fisk, founder and first president of the Council; Mrs. Maud 
Wood Park, first president of the National League of Women Voters and co- 
worker with Miss Blackwell in the long years of suffrage campaigns ; and Bishop 
Lewis O. Hartman, editor of the ^ion's Herald in the early years when Miss 
Blackwell was a contributor. 

Presentation of the portrait to the Council President, Mrs. Lewis O. Hart- 
man, was made by Mrs. Guy W. Stantial (Edna Lamprey Stantial), long-time 
friend and confidante of Miss Blackwell. 

Mrs. Fisk told of their college days, when as a freshman she met the quiet, 
unassuming junior in the College of Liberal Arts. They had belonged to the 
same literary society and throughout the years of their intimate friendship had 
been associated in the women's groups of their alma mater. She told of the 
interest of Miss Blackwell in the oppressed of all nations, of her help through 
translation into the English of the poems of the Armenians, the Russians, the 
Jews and, last of all, the Latin- American countries. 

Bishop Hartman designated Miss Blackwell as "the greatest reformer of 
all contemporary women." He recalled her life as a journalist and contributor to 
the ^ion's Herald, her work for the Gandhi movement, her devotion to the 
Armenians and other peoples, and to the cause of civil liberties. 

At the presentation of the portrait Mrs. Stantial observed that all those 
present knew "with what great love and reverence the Armenians of America 
watched over our dear Miss Blackwell. On every occasion — Easter, birthdays, 
Christmas — they sent gifts of cards, flowers and fruit, to remind her of their 

ISee frontispiece page [133], for photographic reproduction. Miss Blackwell was born in East 
Orange, N. J., Sept. 14, 1857, and died in Cambridge, Mass., March 15, 1950. 



gratitude for her devotion to their people."^ She related how on May 30, 1904 
two hundred of Miss Blackwell's Armenian friends met in Faneuil Hall, and 
presented the portrait to her. On the platform were such notables as Julia Ward 
Howe, Mary A. Livermore, William Lloyd Garrison, Mrs. Susan Fessenden and 
Bishop Sarajian.^ 

Mrs. Stantial then referred to a letter she had recently received from Mr. 
C. Levon Ekserjian, son of the portrait painter, in which he had said: "You 
may be interested in knowing that Julia Ward Howe not infrequently came to 
my father's studio with Miss Blackwell, along with many other of their friends 
whose names are now a memory. While my father was at work these fine people 
were making plans for their campaigns, always planning for mankind." 

When the artist was introduced at the Faneuil Hall meeting, he said : "The 
value of this picture is to be attributed to the subject. I put my heart in the 
work, enrapt by the sublimeness of the subject. I did my duty and when the 
work was finished Miss Blackwell's heart reflected through the depth of her 

And Miss Blackwell's reply, as she received the gift, was typical: "This 
gift gives me a great deal of joy.. But the gift that will please me most is that 
every Armenian be a noble Armenian, be the best kind of a citizen and bring 
honor to his people." 

In a letter to the editor Mrs. Stantial added that Miss Blackwell "was 
fond of this portrait because it kept before her always the devotion of her won- 
derful Armenian friends. ... I have come to realize, all through my experiences 
in raising money for her security and now in the efforts to keep her name and 
her family's name alive in the hearts of the people everywhere, how very much 
she did mean to all of you and how much you all meant to her. Never in my 
life have I seen a record of such devotion, mutual devotion!" 

A Biographical Sketch 

By Maud Wood Park* 


LICE STONE BLACKWELL, more than any other person, symbolized the 
whole range of the struggle of women through two generations to win un- 
trammeled human status. One of her aunts was the first to be ordained a min- 
ister; another was the first woman doctor. Her mother, Lucy Stone, was the 
first Massachusetts woman to go to college; became a lecturer against Negro 

2See in this connection the article by Dr. H. S. Jelalian, "The Significance of Miss Blackwell's 
Birthday for Us." The Armenian Mirror, September 1932, p. 1. 
3See photograph of this affair on page 134 of frontispiece. 

IMrs. Park first met Miss Blackwell at Radcliffe College where Miss Blackwell converted her to 
the suffrage cause. Out of this meeting grew the organization of the National College Suf- 
frage League. — Ed. 



slavery and for women's rights when mere pubhc speaking by women was con- 
sidered an indecency; and throughout her Hfe was one of the half-dozen great 
national figures in the women's movement. Her father, Henry B. Blackwell, 
gave a lifetime of service to the cause of woman's suffrage. His devotion in the 
suffrage and anti-slavery movements made it possible for his family to carry on 
their work for the rights of women and for oppressed minorities. 

The life of the daughter was inextricably interwoven from babyhood in 
the widely varied activities of her parents, which Miss Blackwell recorded in her 
book, LuCy Stone, Pioneer of Woman's Rights.^ For thirty-four years Miss Black- 
well was assistant editor or editor-in-chief of the Woma7i's Journal,^ founded in 
1870 by her famous mother. For twenty-three years she was secretary of the 
National American Woman Suffrage Association, a merger of the American and 
National Suffrage Associations brought about by her when the two groups were 
having difficulty in agreeing on policy and procedure. It was the new organi- 
zation which in 1918 secured the passage of the nineteenth amendment to the 
Constitution. Miss Blackwell also served as president of the New England and 
Massachusetts Woman Suffrage Associations. 

As Miss Blackwell's chief weapon was the pen, often anonymous, she was 
not personally in the public eye as much as the platform campaigners. But 
her work of editing the Woman's Journal and writing for that paper, as well as 
innumerable leaflets, articles, newspaper letters, and campaign pamphlets sup- 
plied the literature of the movement. Among journalists she was regarded as an 
editor of outstanding ability. In the council chamber she applied her rich wis- 
dom, vast information, fertile mind and dauntless spirit to mapping out the 
strategy which through the years carried the suffrage cause step by step to final 

The instant the ballot was won she took up the task of educating and 
organizing the new voters for public-spirited citizenship. She was Honorary 
Chairman and an active member of the Massachusetts League of Women 
Voters since it organization in 1920. 

In line with her family's pioneering interest in the field of women's educa- 
tion, she served Boston University, her alma mater, as trustee from 1908 on.'* 

Throughout these long years her sensitive humanity has made her responsive 
to countless other struggles against oppression. In 1919 she received the Ford 

2First edition. Boston, Little Brown and Co., 1930, viii, 313p. Present edition published by 
the Alice Stone Blackwell Fund Committee, 21 Ashmont Street, Melrose, Mass. Esther Willard 
Bates in a biographical sketch of Miss Blackwell, Providence Bulletin, Providence, R. I., 
March 29, states that the sioffragists called her mother their "Morning Star." — Ed. 

^Assisted her father and mother on the Woman's Journal, Boston, 1881-1893, and was editor- 
in-chief until 1917, when the Woman Voter and the Headquarters Newsletter were con- 
solidated into the Woman Citizen, after which it was published by the National American 
Woman Suffrage Association. 

*Miss Blackwell was graduated from Boston University in 1881 with the A.B. degree, and was 
made a Doctor of Humanities by the same institution in June 1945. She was also a member 
of the American Association of University Women, and president of its Boston chapter. 



Hall Forum Gold Medal for honored service to humanity.^ Roused by the 
Armenian massacres of the '90's, she became a life-long champion of that people. 
Among her tireless and varied efforts to win them public understanding and 
support she rendered into English verse her well-known volume, Armenian 
Poems, which underwent two editions — one in 1896, and the other in 1916.® 
Her devotion to Armenia was recognized by the bestowal of the Order of 

The atrocious oppression of the Tzar's government led her to active work 
with the American Friends of Russian Freedom. Her warm cooperation and 
friendship with Madam Breshkovsky extended over many years and included the 
editing of her autobiography and letters.'^ 

The struggles of labor equally enlisted her quick sympathies on countless 
occasions. Repeatedly she raised her voice against exploitation and the suppres- 
sion of free speech, advocating the right to organize, and working for other civil 

Devoted to world peace, she sought during many years to turn her talents to 
its service by promoting cultural appreciation. She rendered into English verse 
Songs of Grief, and Gladness^ (from the Yiddish), Songs of Russia,^ the Hungar- 
ian poems of Petofi ; and Some Spanish American Poets^^ — the latter a monu- 
mental volume of over two hundred poems, opening to North Americans a new 
continent of literature. 

A noteworthy tribute to the importance of the Woman's Journal was made 
by Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt, whose wise leadership brought about the adop- 
tion of the Woman Suffrage Amendment. She said, "No words can express the 
gratitude I feel for the service Miss Blackwell and her dear father and mother 
gave to the woman suffrage movement through the Woman's Journal. Without 
it we would still be unenfranchised." 

Miss Blackwell was the speaker who had the responsibility of replying to the 
arguments of the Anti-suffragists at the annual Woman Suffrage hearings before 

5She had also been a presidential elector for La FoUette in 1924; and honorary vice-chairman 
of the Boston Evening Clinic and Hospital. 

^Boston, Roberts Brothers, 1896, xi, 14-142p. "New and enlarged edition," Boston, Atlantic 
Printing Co., xii, 295p. Bibliography, pp. 290-291. 

SaMelusine, according to an old medieval romance, was the mother of Guy de Lusignan, king 
of Jerusalem (1185-1192), and of Cyprus (1192) ; as such related to Armenian history. Ac- 
cording to the romance one of her ten sons (only four of whom are known to history) was 
king of Armenia. See Sir Algernon T. Tudor-Craig, The Romance of Melusine and de Lusig- 
nan, London, The Century House, 1932, pp, v and I. Any information about the "Order" of 
Melusine is welcome for publication in later issues of this journal. — Ed. 

"^The Little Grandmother of the Russian Revolution, Reminiscensces and Letters of Catherine 
Breshkovsky, Boston, Little, Brown and Co., 1917. 348 p. 

8 St. Louis, Press of the Modern View, cop. 1907, 76 p. Second ed. revised and enlarged. Bos- 
ton, The Williams Co., 1917, xvi, 163 p. 
sChicago, The Author, 1906. 

K^New York and London, Appleton and Co., 1929, xii, 559 p. She was also co-compiler of 
The Yellow Ribbon Speaker, 1911. Present edition, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania 
Press, 1937. London, Humphrey Milford, Oxford University Press. There is a long biblio- 
graphy under her name on the question of Woman's Suffrage. 



the judiciary committee of the Massachusetts legislature. What she could do in 
the twenty minutes allotted to her for rebuttal was almost miraculous. Her 
knowledge of facts and her ability to state them briefly and clearly, her logic, her 
vast common sense and her unfailing good humor made of each terse sentence a 
lightning flash to illumine the black and misleading depths of "anti" eloquence. 
A distinguished lawyer once said that he attended the Massachusetts Woman 
Suffrage hearings whenever he could because he considered Miss BlackweU's 
rebuttal speeches the ablest presentation of controversial matter he had ever 
heard. In spite of the ignominious defeats that she had to face for many years, 
she went on, tireless in spite of frail health, undaunted, always cheerful. 

Once when I told her she was the most heroic person I had ever known, she 
laughed and replied, "But I never did anything except what was in the day's 
work." That characteristic remark indicates the way she has always taken herself. 
If the cause had required that she should be shot at sunrise she would have gone 
out into the cold gray dawn as simply and naturally as she had done everything 
else. Death, too, would have been in the day's work. 

Her courage was not the mere buoyancy of the physically strong to whom 
nerves are unknown, but the reasoned, sustained courage of a person forcing her- 
self to be brave because bravery was needed to accomphsh the work in hand. 

Beneath her gifts as a writer and speaker lay rare devotion, not only to the 
woman's movement, but to all causes that strive for justice for human beings of 
every race, color and creed. Indeed her sympathy for the suffering was so keen 
that it led her to give much time and effort to the prevention of cruelty to 

In the death of Alice Stone Blackwell the world has lost a distinguished 
citizen and humanity one of its best friends. 


Relations with Armenians^ 



ISS BLACKWELL devoted her mind and soul to the culture and cause of 
the Armenian people from that day when the patriotic and talented Russian 
Armenian student, Hovhannes Khachumian arrived in the United States from 
Germany with Mrs. I. Barrows, the editor of the Christian Register (Unitarian 
weekly published in Boston), whom she had come to know at the University of 

Mrs. Barrows had brought KJiachumian to the United States with the 
approval of Catholicos Khrimian, to represent the Armenian Church at the 

lAn Armenian version of this article appeared in Baikar, Armenian daily published in Boston, 
April 1 and 2, 1950. 



World Congress of Religions to be held in Chicago in 1893. The other member 
to represent the Armenian Church was Minas Tcheraz, the well-known Armenian 
patriot and editor of UArmenie, published in London. 

Mrs. Barrows was already acquainted with the situation in Armenia — the 
exploitation to which the Armenians had been subjected and the oppression of 
the vile and vicious Turkish government — through Garabed H. Papazian, when 
he had visited the editorial office for the first time and suggested that an editorial 
be written about the plight of the Armenian people. 

Mrs. Barrows introduced Khachumian to Miss Alice Stone Blackwell, then 
editor of the Woman's Journal which had a wide circulation among women 
intellectuals. Miss Blackwell was inspired by Khachumian's sincere and devoted 
personality and his patriotic utterances, and became deeply interested in the 
life and cause of the Armenian people. She became acquainted with Armenian 
intellectuals and students, and in the midst of her busy life this talented lady 
started transcribing into English verse Armenian poetry from the verbatim 
English prose of Khachumian and others. 

Khachumian, who had studied a year at Harvard University, despite his 
busy life, established relations with Armenian students and intellectuals who had 
come to the United States, and organized an Armenian students forum. With 
his presence, patriotism, enthusiasm and candor he inspired the body of student 
emigres. They met once a month, and one of them presented a paper on a 
national, historical or political theme, which was followed by a discussion. He 
hoped to establish relations between them and the Armenian student body in 
Leipzig, Germany, as well as with the body of Russian intellectuals. To this end 
Arsen Diran started to correspond with Gregory Ardzrouni's Mshag under the 
pen name of "Armen." 

Gradually the Armenian students in the United States, whose revolutionary, 
patriotic ideals of freedom and independence had been reinforced in this country, 
gave themselves to the task of introducing Armenia to the Americans. The 
answer to their dream they found in Miss Blackwell, who had by this time made 
the support of the Armenian question her aim, and had decided to place her gifts 
at its service. The translation of Armenian poetry into English, an excellent 
medium of orienting America with the political aspirations and cultural achieve- 
ments of the Armenian people, was close to their hearts. It was also found to be 
very dear to Miss Blackwell. 

The first poem translated was probably R. Patkanian's '''The Banks of the 
Araxes River." Mr. Henry B. Blackwell, Miss Blackwell's father, pronounced 
Mihran Damadian's "Talvorik" the most beautiful poem in the collection. It 
was also intensely revolutionary in spirit. That was the tone of the entire collec- 
tion. Under the cruel Turkish policy of oppression, Armenian youth newly 
awakened were imbued with the revolutionary spirit, and all the poets and 
literary masters sang of their people's sufferings, love of freedom, and determin- 
ation to rid themselves of the oppressor. They could not have thought or felt 



otherwise. In that atmosphere the translations were made ; and the selections 
were, therefore, mainly from patriotic and revolutionary poetry. 

Miss Blackwell first published these poems in important American news- 
papers and periodicals. Later, in 1897, she pubhshed them as a separate volume. 
It was republished in 1917, Influential newspapers, individuals and reviewers 
were in high praise of Miss Blackwell's translations, acquainting them with 
Armenian literature and the Armenian's love of freedom. 

To the approximately one hundred and thirty-five translations the following 
made literal translations for Miss Blackwell : Hovhannes Khachumian, Garabed 
H. Papazian, Minas Tcheraz, Kevork Tourian, Arshag Tchobanian, Harutiun 
Asian, Avedis B. Selian, Dr, Varzhabedian, Arsen Diran, Sahag Ghetjian, Aram 
Torosian, Karekin Manougian, O. H. Ateshian, Arshag Mahdesian, Bedros A, 
Goeljik. Later Vahe Haig and others also contributed. 

The poems came from eastern (Russian) and western (Turkish) Armenian 
authors, and a number from older writers — Bedros Tourian, Archbishop Khoren 
Nar-Bey, R, Patkanian (Kamar Katiba), Adom Yarjanian (Siamanto), Hov- 
hannes Hovhannissian, Gatholicos Megrdich Khrimian, Mihran Damadian, 
Nahapet Kouchak, Shoushanik Kourghinian, Avetis Aharonian, Nerses Shnor- 
hali, Sayat Nova, T. Terzian, S. A. Dodokhian, Arshag Tchobanian, Megrdich 
Beshigtashlian, Father Gh.- Alishan, Taniel Varuzhan, Hovhannes Tumanian, 
Mrs. Z. Assadoor (Sibil), M. Portoukalian, Arshag Mahdesian, Hacob Melik 
Hacobian (Raffi), Avetik Isahakian, Bishop Garegin Servantztiantz, Dikran 
Yergat, Ashough Djivani, Grigor Narekatsi, Koucharian and Michael Nalpan- 

In their effort to introduce Armenia to freedom-loving Americans, the 
patriotic and revolutionary young Armenian intellectuals did not regard the 
translation of Armenian poetry into English sufficient. Through personal ap- 
peals and persistent effort they acquainted influential intellectuals with the per- 
secutions to which the Armenians were subjected, the brutalities of the Turks, and 
the aspirations and right of the Armenians to live as a free people. 

The massacre of Sassoun of 1894 shocked Americans as it did the entire 

As a result of the efforts of Khachumian, Papazian and Movses Gulezian 
the "Friends of Armenia" society was organized under the presidency of the 
well-known author, Mrs. Julia Ward Howe^ and a campaign for funds was 
launched for the victims. It was sponsored by and received the active support 
of outstanding intellectuals, governors, senators and publicists who were fre- 
quently present at meetings of public protest and fund raising. Here are a few 
of the names of these great Americans: Edward Everett Hale, the famous 
preacher ; Edward Clement, the editor of the Boston Transcript ; William Lloyd 
Garrison ; Francis Walker, the president of the school of technology ; Bishop 

^Note discrepancy as to who was the first president of the "Friends of Armenia" society, 
which Miss Blackwell says was Mrs. Isabelle C. Barrows. See p. 150 of this issue of the 
journal. — Ed. 



Phillips Brooks,^ the great Episcopal ecclesiastic ; Henry B. Blackwell, the father 
of Miss Blackwell ; Mr. and Mrs. Samuel J. Barrows ; Dr. Francis Edward Clark, 
the organizer and first president of the Christian Endeavor Society. The nerve 
and soul and tireless worker in this organization, however, was Miss Blackwell. 

All was not clear sailing for the Armenian cause, however. Arsen Diran 
wrote in the August 10, 1904 issue of Tsain Hairenyaitz (The Voice of the 
Fatherland) : "During that period in America also, attacks against the Ar- 
menians and unfavorable opinions concerning their struggle for freedom were 
not absent. Papers and individuals purchased by the Turks gave themselves to 
the work of that propaganda, against which Miss Blackwell fought with her im- 
pressive and concise answers, and she bridled their irresponsible tongues." 

After the great carnage of 1895, when the number of the needy Armenians 
swelled by the thousands of orphans and widows. Miss Blackwell put her whole 
effort into the task of helping them. Wherever a public meeting or campaign 
for funds was on, there she was, with her moral supjx)rt and her material con- 

After the massacre, when Armenian emigres were arriving in the United 
States, the Immigration Department required $40,000.00 in bonds. For a 
while this requirement distracted the Friends of Armenia, but the great-hearted 
Dr. Blackwell voluntarily took upon himself to put up the bond. 

Mrs. Barrows and Miss Blackwell left for Germany so that they might 
see Hovhannes Khachumian before his death, concerning whose serious illness 
they had heard ; but while they were yet on board the ship the news of Khachu- 
mian's death arrived. After reaching Germany, Mrs. Barrows attempted to 
secure the books and papers of Khachumian. She succeeded only through the 
aid of the American embassy, as the Russian ambassador had already taken an 
interest in his belongings, Khachumian being a Russian subject. 

The two American ladies then returned to England, where they met James 
Bryce and other distinguished Englishmen friendly to the Armenians. They 
visited also Mihran Damadian and other Armenian revolutionary leaders who 
had succeeded in escaping from the Turkish hell by the skin of their teeth. 

After collecting much information and books and official documents relat- 
ing to the Armenian question, Miss Blackwell returned to the United States and 
redoubled her efforts in the interest of the Armenian cause. 

On May 30, 1904, the Armenians in the United States organized an honor- 
ary dinner on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of Miss Blackwell's activities 
on behalf of their cause, under the presidency of Bishop Hovsep Sarajian, on 
which occasion she was presented with the portrait of herself painted by Mr. 
K. Ekserjian. 

The Catholicos, Khrimian Hairig, in appreciation of her great service to the 
Armenian people, had sent from Echmiadzin, the seat of the Armenian Church, 

^Bishop Brooks' interest in the Armenian cause must precede the massacre of Sassoun of 1894, 
as he had died the previous year. — Ed. 



an encyclical of grace together with a necklace of amber,'* which Miss Blackwell 
wore on special occasions and at public functions. 

In 1917 when the Armenian question and a United States mandate over 
Armenia became important issues of the day, it is difficult to imagine the en- 
thusiasm of Miss BlackweU for the new day which seemed to be on the verge 
of dawning for her beloved Armenians. At the great International Bazaar in 
Boston for the benefit of the needy, in the success of which Mrs. Bertha Papazian 
and Alice Stone Blackwell played an important part, Miss Blackwell brought 
forth the second edition of her translated poetry. 

In 1938 when I went to Boston I visited Miss Blackwell to pay my respects. 
She was then living in Cambridge, Mass. She had grown old. Her eyes were 
weakened ; but she kept in her mind the brightness and vitality of her youthful 
days. She revealed with grief that the necklace of amber had been stolen, and 
then added, "Although they have stolen it, the blessing of Khrimian Hairig 
still rests upon me." 

Armenians are infinitely grateful to the noble lady who gave so freely of 
her vigor, heart, mind and purse for ameliorating the sufferings and promoting 
the interests of the Armenian people. 


Interest in Armenians Political Destiny 


NLIKE some other friends whose interest in the plight of the Armenian 
people was confined solely to relief measures, Miss Blackwell took "passionate 
interest"^ in the political aspects of the Armenian cause. The editor of this 
journal was informed some years ago by Mr. Charles V. Vickery, for many 
years the executive secretary of the Near East Relief, that he and Mr. Arshag 
Mahdesian, the editor of The New Armenia, disagreed at this jx)int. Mah- 
desian was bitter over the fact that Vickery and others associated with him were 
solely interested in extending relief to the Armenians, and would not help them in 
their struggle for political independence which, once achieved would have 
made relief unnecessary. 

It is significant in this connection that the office of The New Armenia be- 
came all but the headquarters of Miss Blackwell.^ The following details are 

^The story of how the Catholicos selected this necklace and how it was received by Miss 

Blackwell is given by Sahag Chetjian, with whom it was sent to America, in Baikar, March 29, 

30, and 31, 1950. Mr. Chetjian also tells the very interesting story of how Mrs. Barrows 

first met Hovhannes Khachumian in Leipzig in 1890-1891, how he was led to come to the 

United States, how he became instrumental in interesting Miss Blackwell in the Armenian 

cause, and other particulars about his life and death in Germany — all as told to him by Miss 

Blackwell herself. — Ed. 

^So characterized in an editorial in The Nation, March 25, 1950. 

2 A. Nourhan, "Alice Stone Blackwell," Eritassard Hayastan, March 29, 1950, p. 1. 



taken from remeniscences of Sahag Chetjian,^ who came to know Miss Black- 
well closely during the first decade of this century : 

In addition to her interests in the general field of literature and poetry, Miss 
Blackwell followed with interest the aims and activities of Armenian and Rus- 
sian political parties. She wished to secure objective information on the Rus- 
sian socialist revolutionaries and social democrats. She had a great regard for 
Mrs. Catherine Breshovsky. When the latter arrived in the United States, Miss 
Blackwell established close relations with her and entertained her in her home. 
She was always grieved when some calamity beclouded the poHtical future of 
the Armenian people. When she learned about the terroristic activities of mis- 
guided Armenians in London and Boston, she said with great emotion : "I am 
very sorry, they will spoil your reputation abroad." 

In 1904 a meeting was organized in Boston by Armenian patriots under 
the leadership of Mrs. Barrows and Miss Blackwell, James Bryce was the speaker. 
It was in the days of the uprising in Sassoun. Bryce, who spoke on the Armenian 
question, had said: You Armenians should never place any hopes in European 
diplomacy. Europe will not come to your aid. Be circumspect in demonstra- 
tions, otherwise through massacres and other measures you will be decimated in 
your own country, and then the Armenian question will cease to exist — there 
will not be enough of you to count. Be circumpect and wait for political de- 
velopments to become favorable to your cause. 

Representatives of the various Armenian political parties were present. 
At the conclusion of the meeting, Vramian approached Bryce and protested 
vehemently against the point of view expressed in his speech. He then left the 
meeting hall. Outside, an argument arose between Vramian, the Armenakans, 
and the Reorganized Hunchakians. Among those who spoke were G. Papazian, 
Karekin Manougian, and Askanaz Melkonian, They attacked Vramian in- 
dignantly, and condemned the uprising of Sassoun. When the rumor of what 
was happening outside reached Miss Blackwell inside, she slipped out for fear 
the argument might develop into a fight. Fifteen years later Vramian him- 
self was advising the Armenians in Van to be circumspect ! 

In 1906 when the Armenakans brought Portoukalian to the United States 
to reorganize their party, they introduced him to Miss Black\7ell. She was much 
pleased when she learned that he was also a poet. 

Miss Blackwell usually took part in meetings of a cultural character. Know- 
ing quite closely the Vaspurakan (Van) Armenians— Karekin Manougian, 
Askanaz Melkonian, Dr. Nalchajian, Hovhannes Hagopian — she joined the 
Vaspurakan Educational Association. In addition to the usual membership fee 
she contributed an annual sum as a gift. She presided at the meetings as honor- 
ary chairman. She opened the meeting by praising Khrimian Hairig, pointed to 
the necklace of amber which Hairig had given her, and in the midst of the 

^Baikar, March 31, 1950, pp. 2-3. The next seven paragraphs are taken from this article. 



applause, sat and occupied herself with her knitting.'* In 1910 when Askanaz 
Melkonian announced to her that at Varag an agricultural school would be 
opened in honor of Hairig and that in that connection a campaign for funds 
had started among the Armenians in the United States, Miss Blackwell expressed 
great joy concerning the project and promised her material share in it when the 
final arrangements were made. Unfortunately the disaster of 1915-1920 
wrecked every dream of the Armenians, and put an end to the project of the 
agricultural school at Varag. 

When in 1923-1924 Chetjian saw Miss Blackwell for the last time, she was 
then living in an apartment. She had willed her home to the city of Dorchester 
and had withdrawn with her secretary to the apartment." "We spoke," he says, 
"about the old days. She was interested in the friends of the past. She was very 
optimistic about the future of Armenia ; and suggested that Armenia never sever 
her relations with Russia. 'Yes,' she said, 'democratic liberties are desirable, but 
Armenians should not be hopeless. They will be realized in due time.' " 

Armenians will never forget the friendship of Miss Blackwell and will al- 
ways cherish her memory with a deep sense of gratitude for all that she did for 
them. She was, indeed, the guardian angel of the Armenian people.^ When 
tomorrow the history of the Armenian-American community is written, a special 
chapter in it will be devoted to this great lady. 


A Tribute 

By Samuel A. Eliot^ 

Y^ E are gathered here, my friends, to bring our tribute of reverence and 
gratitude for the life that has been so long and so valiantly lived here among 
us. If indeed it were possible for each and every one of us to express in some 
single sentence the feeling that bound us to the life we here commemorate, then 
from our separate experiences and our different points of view and of contact 
there would be added to the silent tribute of your presence the fitting words of 

4Mrs. Guy Lamprey Stantial who kindly read the entire manuscript of this symposium and 

made several valuable corrections and additions, commented thus at this point : "No one 

here ever saw Miss Blackwell knitting. We thought she never knew how to use her hands in 

that capacity. In all instances where I ever saw her applauded she always folded her hands 

in her lap and sat with bowed head, modestly accepting the plaudits of the audience. Maybe 

some of her friends sav/ her knitting, but*" those of her family with whom I have talked today 

say they never did." 

f'Mrs. Stantial's correction and comment is as follows: Miss Blackwell turned her home over 

to the Morgan Memorial when she went into the Dorchester apartment but she did not deed 

it to them until her money was taken from her in 1935. Then it was agreed to furnish her 

with an annuity for the rest of her life in return for the use of the house. Title to the house 

went to the Morgan Memorial on her death. 

^So characterized by Dr. M. S. Kaprielian, according to Dikran Megunt Spear, Baikar, April 

7, 1950. 

ITribute at the memorial service held at the Arlington Street Church, Boston, March 18, 1950. 



appreciation and affection. I'm sure that we all feel that so radiant a life 
cannot be permitted to pass into the silence without loving praise, while at the 
same time one who tries to express our common feeling must respect the reserves 
that are the rights of a gentlewoman. 

What a rich and abundant life it was! We don't have to force words or 
phrases when we speak of Alice Stone Blackwell. You know the lives of many 
good, kind people seem to lack emphasis. They are sort of negatively good. 
They do the right things but not so much on their own initiative as because 
others do them or it is the custom of their set to do them. How refreshing and 
invigorating to come into contact with a distinctive personality ready to exercise 
an independent judgment, able to see clearly and imagine vividly and will nobly. 
Here was a positive and affirmative nature — one that said "yes" more often than 
"no." She never waited for an idea or a movement to become popular. If she 
believed in it she just set to work to make it popiilar — and the slowness of the 
progressive reforms she advocated so perseveringly, the apathy and indifference 
of people toward the causes that to her were so imperative, never seemed to fret 
her, at least in public. She may have shown some natural impatience to those 
nearest her and if so I'm sure that she could express her indignation in suf- 
ficiently forcible and appropriate terms — but to us who were her allies and 
admirers without being her intimates every defeat seemed only to stiffen her 
backbone and her eagerness to get into the battle again. 

Alice Blackwell came, as you know, from a sturdy, bold, exceptionally long- 
lived stock. With her first breath she must have drawn in something of her 
parents' devotion to the anti-slavery movement and the cause of equal rights 
for women. She inherited the intellectual and moral equipment that prepared 
her for the service she was to render to humanity, and she inherited too a certain 
scorn of consequences when she knew she was on the right road. Like her gifted 
mother — whose biography she wrote — she could speak with fine freedom, force 
and fluency. She answered every summons of conscience — oh, not with the sort 
of stoi6 resignation which is about all that some of us can muster — ^but with a 
resolute, contagious enthusiasm. How her penetrating intelfigence went right 
to the heart of any problem or emergency ! I don't think she ever knew or recog- 
nized a terminum : life to her was a thoroughfare. One cause won just meant 
a chance to tackle another enterprise — and at it she went without waiting to 
wonder if anybody would follow her. The reward of today's success was just 
the vista of tomorrow's tasks and the recompense of duty done was more duty 
to do — and more joy in doing it. The good of today presaged the better of 

What a faculty she had of putting herself in the place of abused and op- 
pressed and underprivileged people ! That took keen imagination as well as sym- 
pathy and compassion. She valued men and women, did she not, not by con- 
ventional standards but by their intrinsic worth. Her own candor and vigorous 
common-sense scattered all the trivial artificialities of our social intercourse. 



Her talk was entertaining, instructive but not pedantic, and sometimes a bit pro- 
vocative. She lived on a high plane of thought and action but did not fail to 
see the humorous side of things and could sometimes laugh at herself and at, 
or with, some of her strong-minded associates. 

There was nothing vague or obscure in her thinking. Right was right and 
wrong was wrong. She dwelt in no neutral zone and she had no use for com- 
promises when moral issues were at stake. She was well assured that what is 
morally wrong can never be politically right. Courage and confidence were the 
good angels that dwelt with her and through her breathed a benediction on us all. 
How wide and prodigal too were her sympathies. They overflowed all 
boundaries. They were as broad as humanity — ^including white and black, 
Greek and Armenian, bond and free. She could say with Lowell: 
Wherever wrong is done, 

To the humblest and the weakest 'neath the all beholding sun. 
That wrong is also done to us: and they are slaves most base. 
Whose love of right is for themselves and not for all their race. 

I don't remember that I ever talked with her about rehgion. Somehow the 
pre-eminence of the spiritual values seemed to be just taken for granted. I am 
sure that for her the great commandments were not those that begin "Thou 
shaft not" but those that begin "Thou shalt." For her religion was not a static 
formula but a dynamic process — not renunciation but the multiplication of free- 
dom and power. To accept the rich privileges of life with an alert body, an 
eager mind, a lively imagination, a steadfast purpose — that was to her the 
Father's business in which she had a responsible partnership. 

So she lived her 92 years, vivid, resilient — in communion with all sorts and 
conditions of men, in constant pursuit of the things that are just and lovely 
and of good report, in the faith that this mysterious and majestic universe is 
well ordered — and then, with no wasting malady or long decay, the end was 

In the biography of her mother, Lucy Stone, Miss Blackwell printed some 
verses which her mother had clipped from a newspaper and had beside her as 
she lay quietly dying. They seem as appropriate for the daughter as for the 
mother : 

Up and away like the dew of the morning. 
That soars from the earth to its home in the sun. 
So let me steal away gently and lovingly, 
Only remembered by what I have done. 

Needs there the praise of the love-written record, 
«. The name and the epitaph graved on the stone? 

The things we have lived for, let them be our story, 
We ourselves but remembered by what we have done. 

Not myself, but the truth that in life I have spoken. 
Not myself, but the seed that in life I have sown. 
Shall pass on to ages, all about me forgotten. 
Save the truth I have spoken, the things I have done. 



A Sonnet 

By William Lloyd Garrison, Jr.^ 

J^HE sweeps the wide horizon with her glass 

Watching the human drama there unroll, 

And, tracing the events upon her scroll, 

Divines the meaning of what comes to pass. 

Across the years her clear coherent speech 

Has flashed like sunlight through a rifted cloud 

To lend illumination when the crowd 

With cruel hands the weak has sought to reach. 

The Psalmists' days have passed her with a smile. 

Her heresies enjoy the guise of law, 

And now, with Delphic word at her command. 

Beside her tripod at the cavern's maw. 

With flame-tipped thoughts does she the world beguile 

And, as of old, drive darkness from the land. 

In Memoriam 


FORTNIGHT before her death on March fifteenth, Miss Blackwell ex- 
pressed two longings — characteristically not for herself but to keep the cause of 
woman's freedom alive in the minds and hearts of coming generations. She 
wanted the biography of Lucy Stone put into the libraries of all the women's 
colleges of the nation, and she wanted the private papers of Lucy Stone and 
Henry B. Blackwell put in order and indexed so that these priceless records of 
the anti-slavery and woman's movements might be available for the future. 

It should be a privilege for every Armenian to help make the last wishes of 
Alice Stone Blackvv^ell come true. 

Memorial contributions may be sent to the Alice Stone Blackwell Fund, 21 
Ashmont Street, Melrose 76, Massachusetts. 

^Written in 1936. Read at Miss Blackwell's Memorial Service by the minister of Arlington 
Street Church, Rev. Dana McLean Greeley. 


Armenians as I Have Known Them 

By Alice Stone Blackwell^ 

J\ YOUNG man was afraid that his sweetheart was going to jih him. He asked 
an older friend what his opinion of woman was. The older man answered, "What 
do you mean by asking me my opinion of one-half the human race? There are 
all kinds of women. There are some who cannot be trusted out of your sight. 
There are others who can be trusted through thick and thin," 

This story was called to my remembrance when I was asked to write a short 
article on "Armenians as I have Known Them." Among the Armenians, as 
among all other races and nationalities, there are all kinds of people, good, bad 
and indifferent. I have met Armenians of all these kinds. 

Many years ago a famous writer said that one can tell with almost laughable 
certainty what a man's wife is like, by finding out what is his opinion of women. 
An American who knows one bad Armenian is apt to jump to the conclusion 
that all other Armenians are like him. Of course this is wholly unreasonable and 
unjust ; but it is well for our Armenians to remember that if one of them proves 
himself untrustworthy, he not only destroys his own reputation but helps to de- 
stroy the reputation of all his compatriots among thoughtless Americans; and 
the world is full of thoughtless persons. 

Among my Armenian friends there have been some of the noblest charac- 
ters that I have known — men and women thoroughly worthy of their heroic 
ancestors whose history has been an inspiration to me for more than forty 
years. It is well within my power to make the comparison, for it has been my 
good fortune to know many extraordinary men and women of different national- 
ities. I have found these fine characters among both the Armenian-speaking 
and Turkish-speaking Armenians, among both the Protestants and the Gre- 

My first Armenian friend was Ohannes Khachumian,^ a brilliant young 
Russian Armenian, a theological student. Mrs. Isabelle C. Barrows, who had 
met him in Europe, persuaded him to come to the United States to represent 
the Armenian National Church at the World's Congress of Religions which was 
held at Chicago in 1893. I met him the same year in her summer camp where 
he opened to me a whole new world in Armenian history and literature. 

^Letter written some years ago at the request of Arthur Derounian, copied from one of her 
scrapbooks for Armenian Affairs by Mrs. Edna Lamprey Stantial. We assume, on the basis of 
internal evidence, that this letter was written in 1933, on the occasion of the assassination of 
Archbishop Levon Tourian. The death of Archbishop Tourian must have crushed the heart 
of Miss Blackwell, for in the letter to the editor in which Mrs. Stantial refers to this article, 
she adds : "Somewhere [in the scrapbooks] I saw another reference to the Armenian people, 
but I cannot find it. But this was the sentence that impressed me : 'When I hear of an Armen- 
ian who has done something wrong, I feel like a grandmother whose grandchild has hurt her.' " 


2See supra pp. 139 ff for details of the life of Khachumian and his relations with Miss 




The first Society of Friends of Armenia was organized that summer with 
Mrs. Barrows as president, and myself as secretary. 

Ohannes KJiachumian studied for some time at an Episcopal theological 
school in this country. He then returned to Europe and died a year or two later ; 
but the influence of his short life still survives. 

It is a thousand pities that so many of our young Armenians of today re- 
main in ignorance of their nation's wonderful history. It is as if they were entitled 
to a great treasure buried by their ancestors but never took the trouble to dig it 
up. It is uplifting to know that one had ancestors whom one should always try 
to live up towards, even if one can never fully live up to them. 

By Raffi (Melik Hagopian) 

j^ PEAK, O lake ! why are thy waters silent 
Wilt thou not lament with luckless me? 
Move, ye zephyrs, move the rippling wavelets! 
With this lake my tears shall mingled be. 

Tell me, lake — for thou hast been a witness 
Of our history from the earliest day — 
Shall Armenia, that was once a garden, 
Always be a thorny desert gray? 

Shall our hapless fatherland forever 

By a foreign master be down-trod? 

Are the Armenians and their sons unworthy, 

Judged before the righteous throne of God? 

Is a glad day coming, when a banner 
Shall on Ararat its folds expand. 
And from every side Armenian pilgrims 
Hasten to their beauteous fatherland? 

iFrom Armenian Poems, rendered into English verse by Alice Stone Blackwell, [published by 
Robert Chambers], Boston, 1917, p. 124. 


Notes on the Evolution of Armenians 


and Its Influence Abroad 

By Vahan Hagopian^ 




N the New York Public Library is a book entitled Recueil de Cent Estampes, 
Representant Differeiites Nations du Levant by M. Le Hay, under the orders of 
M. de Ferriol, ambassador of the King to the Sublime Porte, printed in Paris 
in 1714, showing the colorful and picturesquely varied costumes worn at the 
time by dignitaries, functionaries, officers, and members of trades and crafts in 

A full page illustration of a standing personage holding the attribute of his 
craft is captioned "Un Architecte Armenien" which bears out the fact, little 
known even to Armenians, that they had almost a monopoly as master builders in 
the Turkish empire, the tradition of which went back to Byzantium when an 
Armenian architect named Tiridates was summoned in A.D. 989 from his coun- 
try to repair serious damage done to St. Sophia by an earthquake. 

Armenians are seldom aware that probably the most outstanding mani- 
festation of their past culture is their contribution to architecture, as has been 
emphasized by leading authorities on archeology and the history of architec- 
ture, among whom may be mentioned Professors Grimm, Strzygowski, Benoit and 
Choisy. The architecture of Armenia, although influenced by Byzantium and 
Persia, has flourished in a most original manner, with its own marked char- 
acteristics, and in turn has influenced not only adjoining countries but has had 
its repercussions in distant lands. 

The architecture of the inhabitants, Armenians and Georgians, of the 

iVahan Hagopian, Architect A. I. A., born in Cairo, was educated in the French Christian 
schools there. As a result of their influence he continued with his higher education in Paris, 
where he completed his professional studies with honors and attained the highest degree in 
architecture awarded by the French government. From the beginning of his career he was 
attracted to ecclesiastical architecture. The study of Christian dogmas and liturgies and their 
continual influence on architecture fascinated him. Realizing the important role which 
Armenian architecture plays in this chain of evolution, he went into its study deeply while 
at the Ecole Nationale des Beaux Arts. The subject of his final thesis there was an Armenian 
church and community center. Here he emphasized the philosophy of Armenian design, 
although the group of buildings conformed to modern life and economy. Through the years 
that followed Mr. Hagopian has continued his study and research in Armenian architecture, 
although much of his ecclesiastical design work has been for other nationality groups. — Ed. 



mountain lands between the Black Sea, Anatolia, Upper Mesopotamia, the 
Caspian Sea and the Caucasus mountains may be studied by the remains of 
religious buildings erected after their conversion to Christianity in the last 
quarter of the third century by St. Gregory the Illuminator. Some ruins at 
Garni, near Yerevan, are the earliest known and remind us of an important 
building by King Tiridates, dating from the beginning of the fourth century. 

However, from the beginning of the fifth century, the Christians of Armenia 
were subject to persecutions by the Persians, which slowed up construction. From 
this time dates the plan, if not the upper structures, of the Mother Church, 
situated in the center of the Monastery of Echmiadzin in the Holy See of the 
Armenians at Echmiadzin, which was also known as Vagharshapat. 

The seventh century was a busy era in construction, especially under the 
pontificate of Catholicos Komitas (after A.D. 618) and Nerses III, also called 
the Builder (A.D. 640-661). The former rebuilt on the same foundations the 
Cathedral of Echmiadzin and the nearby churches of Saint Hripsime (A.D. 
618) and Saint Gaiane (A.D. 628-640). The most noteworthy edifice of Nerses 
is the Church of St. Gregory the Illuminator, a shrine to the Armenian apostle 
and also a capital document for the history of Armenian architecture. This 
period was also marked by the unhappy addition of porticos to many ancient 
churches. From A.D. 718 to 728 the Church of Usunlar was built, which is 
undoubtedly contemporaneous to that of Tikor. 

Armenian geographic position between Persia and the Greek empire made 
her, until the tenth century and the protection of the Califs of Baghdad gave her 
kings, a perpetual battlefield. Her development was under handicaps, and by 
the time she had the quiet and security necessary to the creation of great art, 
Byzantian architecture had crystallized itself. Armenia borrowed from it its 
general principles. The plan of the Armenian church of the tenth century is a 
variation of the Byzantine plan. 

Armenia, under the dynasty of the Bagratides (A.D. 859-1080) had a 
period of prosperity, particularly in the last half of the tenth century and the 
beginning of the eleventh, during the reigns of King Ashod III, Sempad II, and 
Gagik I, who encouraged building. 

From the beginning of the tenth century dates the monastery of Akhtamar 
on an island in Lake Van, with its church which is more a jewel than a building ; 
the Church of Pitzounda on the Black Sea ; the Church of Mokwi and that of 
the Holy Cross at Akhpat (A.D. 977-991 ) . The first half of the eleventh century 
produced the Church of Koutais (A.D. 1003), ruined by the Turks in 1691; 
the buildings at Ani, ruined by Arp Asian (1064); the Cathedral (1010), 
Chapel of St. Gregory, Chapel of the Redemptor ( 1041 ) , Convent of Marmashen 
at the north of Alexandropol (Leninakan) ; the churches of Sandjerl (1033- 
1044) ; Nikortzminda under the king Bagrat of Georgia (1027-1072). The end 
©f the eleventh century saw the Church of Samthavis and the Church of the 
Convent of Ghelat. In the twelfth century there was a decrease in building 



activity. Nevertheless, a mausoleum was added to the Church of the Holy Cross 
at Akhpat in 1183, the monastery of Kosha Vank was built near Ani, and the 
Church of St. Gregory was built at Ani in 1215. 

In 1222 came the MongoUan invasion, and since then the architecture of 
Armenia has been on the decline. Upper Georgia, however, was less affected and 
the Monastery of Safar at Akhalsykh, along with the Church of Saint Sava were 
built (1306-1334). 

The high mountain country, swept by rainy winds from the Black Sea, a 
variable and damp climate, and an insufficient all around civilization were a 
handicap to the art of construction. Yet the country offered facilities in the 
procurement of wood, excellent and abundant building stone, and an intelligent 
and active population which did the most with the materials at hand. As lime- 
stone for m.ortar was scarce, the perfectly cut stone in buildings was laid with 
neat dry joints in level courses. This practice lasted until the Middle Ages. 
Alternate courses of brick and stone and brick quoins around corners as in 
Koutais are the exceptions. 

As a consequence of Armenia's religious dependence on Asia Minor and 
northern Syria, of its being open to penetrations from Anatolia and Persia, and 
of a strategic situation which made her the object of constant disputes between 
the Sassanian and Byzantine empires, Armenian architecture naturally felt 
the competing influences of Asia Minor, Syria and Byzantium on the one hand, 
and of the Mesopotamian, Persian, and Moslem on the other hand. Up to the 
tenth century the first were dominant. After this period the latter influence was 
the most felt. Therefore, Armenian architecture may be classified as of the pre- 
tenth and post-tenth centuries. The study of her construction and design char- 
acteristics may be best done in comparison to that of Byzantium from where 
most of her pre-tenth century influence is received. The factor that was com- 
mon to both Syria and Armenia is that they were stone building countries and 
have received influences from the same sources, which they have nevertheless 
expressed in different ways. 



Design Expression and Plan. The Byzantines express on the exterior of 
their buildings the inner divisions and organic structure frankly, while the Ar- 
menians conceal them under an artificial symmetry. This concern for symmetry is 
carried to the point where the dome is placed in the exact center of the overall 
length of the church and the apse is concealed under the main roof. The side 
apses are likewise concealed under the extension of the roof of the side aisles. 
V-shaped niches between the apse and side apses are the only outward expres- 
sion of their relation in plan. These V-shaped niches which are characteristic 



to the style are also found on the other elevations of the church, mainly in the 
buttresses terminating the dome carrying arches. 

The conception of the architectural effect is an original and a happy one. 
The concern about appearance is evident and this sense of the esthetic is en- 
tirely different from that of the East. This architecture is also noteworthy for 
its complete unconcern of material sizes. Another characteristic is the sense of 
the picturesque in the taste for the monumental. 

The plan of the Armenian church is generally rectangular with a nave 
and a transept of equal widths but varying lengths. At the intersection of the 
nave and transept is a polygonal or circular tower which lights the edifice. 

The nave which is terminated on its eastern end by a semi-circular apse 
where the services are held is flanked by aisles of lesser dimensions. Generally 
chapels or small apses, as is customary in the oriental churches, terminate the 

In the earlier churches such as the Cathedral of Echmiadzin and the Church 
of Tikor the ap>se projects beyond the rectangle of the building and its ex- 
terior face is polygonal. In later churches, when the exterior of the apse be- 
came flush with the rectangle of the building, as in Ani Cathedral and St. 
Hripsime, its position was marked on the outside with V-shaped niches on each 
of the sides and rising to the full height of the building. These niches are 
sometimes repeated on the other sides of the building and express the separation 
of the transept from the aisles as well as the nave from the aisles. 

In the Cathedral of Echmiadzin and the Church of St. Hripsime, the 
apses appear on the four sides of the edifice while in the Church of Koutais, in 
addition to the other apse at the east of the nave, is one on each end of the 

Sometimes, as in the churches of Tikor and Usunlar, the Syrian influence 
of projections on the rear end of the church give to the plan the shape of a T 
in the arms of which are exterior small apses, and as in Usunlar, an exterior 
peristyle on the entrance and sides of the building. 

The atrium and generally the narthex are absent. 

The funeral chapels and memorial churches, such as St. Gregory the 
Illuminator, near Echmiadzin, present a circular plan or a square plan with 
absence of nave and transept, and where the apses project directly from the 
arches which support the dome, as in St. Hripsime's Church in Echmiadzin. 

The equilibrium of the construction of the Armenian churches is perfectly 
maintained and expressed. The dome is almost thrustless and carried by arches 
and braced by the vaults of the side apses, side aisles, and are at their critical 
points buttressed by reinforced piers. The proportions of the Armenian church 
are slender. In the eleventh century these were further emphasized with the 
pointed arch, ribbed piers, and on the plain interior walls with decorative ar- 
cades of thin engaged columns supporting raised-on-horse-shoe arches. This 



latter is an Armenian peculiarity totally alien to Byzantium and has been trans- 
mitted to Russian and Balkan churches. 

Along the edges of the buildings and openings as well as acting as friezes 
and decorative bands are concentrated heavy bands of trimming, the weight 
of which is quite in contrast with the small dimensions of the building. These 
braids or ribbons often take the form of leaf ornament of a Sassanian type. 

In the interiors of all these churches we see pointed barrel vaults at the 
ends of which are projecting doubled arches. Where these piers fall, each is 
received and carried to the floor by an individual pilaster or engaged column, 
this giving the appearance of a pier with broken surfaces. This is a forerunner of 
such piers in western Romanesque architecture, which it antedates. 

Construction of Vaults. The Byzantines resorted to brick, which alone 
could allow the spanning of voids with masonry without the help of trusses, 
forms and bracing. A thin slice of masonry was built at a time and supported 
by the adjacent work through the adhesion of the mortar, until the latter hard- 
ened. The work was then continued until the span was covered. This method 
of construction became so established that the Byzantines used it even where 
building stone was abundant. 

In Armenia, however, stone was the logical material to use. But, as vous- 
soirs of large stone could not be held in place even temporarily through adhesion 
of mortar, wooden forms for temporary support were inevitable. Therefore, 
construction was designed to lessen the temporary timber work. 

The Pointed Arch. The pointed arch never appears in the Byzantine 
school, where necessity did not compel its use. Up to the tenth century Armenian 
architecture also used the semicircular arch (Tikor, Usunlar, Koutais). About 
the time of the Cathedral of Ani, the pointed arch had come into being. 

The Persians had long ago found that by use of an "oval" arch for their 
'great spans they could reduce the side thrust on the walls which bore the vaults 
and thus economize on materials. The countries where the pointed arch de- 
veloped were those primarily exposed to the influence of Persia, but where 
also stone had to replace brick. To execute the Persian design in stone would 
have meant excessive thrust at the upper portion of the arch and a complication 
in stone cutting. In such a case the advantages of economy of materials would 
have been offset by a greater difficulty in execution. If, however, the side 
arches were struck with a single radius larger than one half the span from two 
different centers until the arches met, the thrust of the flat portion at the apex 
of the oval would be eliminated. Thus the pointed arch was created. This 
maintained the advantages of the Persian design and, because the curve of the 
arch is now constant, all the voussoirs could be cut on a single pattern. 

The Dome. The Armenian dome presents the appearance of a hollow cone 
resting on pendentifs through a cylindrical drum. The pendentifs are of the 



spherical triangular or conical type. The former denote their Byzantine origin, 
and the latter, their Persian influence. 

The characteristic form of this dome is justified like that of the pointed arch 
because of the requirements of stone construction. The spherical dome which is 
easy to build in brick necessitates complicated stone cutting. Its upper portions, 
being almost flat, cause an excessive thrust. The hollow conical design simpUfies 
the cutting of the stone and, what is more, allows its easier setting without forms. 
Provided the slope of the cone is sufficient, the friction of each on its bed is 
enough to keep it in place, as a corbel, until the ring is completed. Such a 
construction is hardly more difficult than that of a wall. 

This ingenious profile has been used in all the domes built in Armenia from 
the ninth to the twelfth centuries. From Armenia it crossed over and was 
adopted by the Seljuk Turks. As one of those mistakes that often happens in 
second-hand art, the Turks translated this design in brick and carried it from 
Iconium to Nicea, and wherever they extended their domination. 

Another form of Armenian vault is that typified by the one in the Chapel 
of Akhpat, which dates from the twelfth century. Four cross arches or large 
ribbings span the room, two in each direction. This leaves in the center a square 
space which is Ukewise spanned to carry a "lantern" dome. The space between 
the ribbings and the walls is filled with slabs on small arches. This vault ex- 
presses the same conception of design as that of Mihrab of Cordova in Spain, and 
its theory has a strange resemblance to that which gave Gothic construction its 
fundamental character. 

The Arcade and Arch. While the Byzantine arcade on columns is mostly 
structural, its Armenian counterpart, which is described below, is decorative and 
quite alien to it, the columns projecting only slightly from the wall instead of 
standing free. It appears after the tenth century. As to the arch itself, the 
Byzantine being built in brick, presented a flat section, whereas the Armenian, 
being built of stone, was molded mostly in the form of parallel cylinders. 

The Column and Supports for Arches. While the Byzantine architects 
endeavored to conceal the springs of arches, the Armenians emphasized them. 
When a pillar was to receive a series of arches or ribbings, the pillar was broken 
up in appearance so that each ribbing fell on an individual column or pilaster. 
These, however, were generally engaged in a group forming the prototype of the 
pillars of the arches of the Gothic churches. 

Used decoratively, the engaged column (part of the wall) was surmounted 
by a bulbous capital which perpetuated itself in an exaggerated form in Slavonic 

Decoration. A definite distinction in decoration may be noticed between 
the schools that built in brick and those that built in stone. In the former, to 
which belongs the Byzantine, the decoration is purely architectural in that its 
sculpture is possible out of the masonry surfaces. 



Sculpture and Ornamentation. Byzantine sculpture has never been any- 
thing than a raised drawing. It has its originaHty, but it never got its inspiration 
from nature. As a matter of fact, with the advent of Christianity, sculpture in 
Greek art ceased to exist. 

Armenian sculpture borrows all of its motifs from interlaced embroidery- 
trimmings. Braids, frame panels and openings run on edges of buildings and 
cornices as bands. 

This decoration is always out of scale as contrasted with the surfaces on 
which it is carved, and is concentrated. Its contrast with plain surfaces gives 
it its pecuhar character and vigorous effect. The influence of this style of 
ornamentation is found in all of Russia, particularly in southern Russian archi- 
tecture, as well as in the lower Danubian countries, especially in Serbia. It has 
also had its influence in Scandinavia, England, Ireland, and Normandy. 

Color. While the brick surfaces of Byzantine construction lend themselves 
admirably to marble veneers, inlays, glass, mosaics and fresco paintings, the 
schools that build in stone have their own mode of decoration. With them 
sculpture takes its importance and steps to the foreground, while color becomes 
unnecessary. If painting, mosaics, and marble inlays are not eliminated, they 
play a secondary part in Armenian architecture. In the Ani Cathedral, color is 
reduced to a play of tones arrived at by the alternating of the white and grey 
courses of stonework. 



The various component elements of Armenian architecture have been so 
thoroughly assimilated and developed by the ingenuity of Armenian craftsmen 
that the resultant is a distinct art with its own strong characteristics. Through 
these characteristics we may follow the influence of Armenian architecture, 
which radiated in several directions and influenced far distant countries. 
Armenian architecture was favored by the prestige of its monasteries and by the 
migration of a part of the population of Ani, after its fall to the Seljuks (A.D. 
1066), to the north of the Caspian Sea, the Crimea, Galicia, Moldavia, Serbia 
and Poland where Armenian settlements have perpetuated themselves to the 
present day. 

Armenian architecture has undoubtedly furnished Seljuk Anatolia with 
building formulae ; Russia, with programs and masters ; Serbia and Moldavia- 
Walachia, with models of decoration. There is a marked resemblance between 
the plan of Saint Sophia at Kiev with the Georgian church of Molui ; the 
structure of some of the cupolas and especially the inspiration of the ornamen- 
tation of many an ancient Russian church shows that Armenian influence was 



strongly competing with that of Byzantium. This may be explained by the Trans- 
caucasian influence, by the relation of Russian princes with Armenia and 
Georgia, and by the settlement on the Russian border of refugees from the 
city of Ani. 

Armenian influence in the Danubian countries was due in the first place 
to monastic relations between both countries. Saint Sava (A.D. 1169-1236), 
archbishop primate of Serbia, great artisan of the civilization of his country 
and of its ecclesiastic organization visited the Armenian monasteries. Secondly, 
the Armenian settlements in southern Russia, Poland, and Moldavia had also 
their influence. 

The general conception of the Russian churches of Pokrov, Kiev, Vladimir, 
and more particularly of the Roumanian churches and those of Serbia is Ar- 
menian more than Byzantine. If in these churches the Armenian pointed arch 
was not adopted, as we see especially in Serbia, Roumania and Moldavia, the 
Armenian character of decoration is all the more marked, such as in the churches 
of Ravinica, Krusevac, Studenitza where Armenian ornament is applied on a 
Byzantine bulk. The churches of Kuritsa, Argich, Tergovitch, Dragomima 
have no ornament that is not definitely Armenian. From the point of view of 
decorative architecture, the Danubian valley seems to be an Armenian colony. 
The only element omitted seems to be the pointed arch. 

Armenian architecture has also had its influence on the evolution of the 
Byzantine school, as a consequence of Armenia's supplying Byzantium with 
administrators, generals, emperors, and also architects. 

Thus, the coast of the Black Sea from Armenia to Constantinople is related 
to Armenian art. From Byzantium Armenian influence followed the course of 
commerce over the great rivers, the Danube, the Don, the Dniester and the 
Volga to Novgorod, the Vistula, and the borders of Scandinavia. The presence 
of Armenian art is felt as far as Norway and Sweden. This influence does not 
stop in Scandinavia, but is carried by the Norsemen. It follows their wake and 
manifests itself in the romanesque ornamentation of Normandy, England and 
Ireland. In Ireland, the details of usual decoration present such resemblance 
with Armenian decoration that they have long been noticed and seem to con- 
firm this distant radiation from Asia. 

Without being absolutely able to prove it, we may, with considerable jus- 
tification assume on the basis of a comparison of the general trend and the 
different peculiarities of Armenian churches and the more recent Carohngian 
Romanesque churches of northwestern Europe, that the former must have had 
its influence on the latter. We may also see in the plan of Ani Cathedral the 
piers of many assembled columns and the pointed arch in section which begins to 
occur in Europe a century later. 


Literary Pilgrimages to Armenia 

Editorial Note 

The two articles below, though written independently, without consultation 
on the part of the authors, are presented here together under a single heading as 
they deal with the same subject. Each writer in his own characteristic way bears 
witness to the fact that for the past thirty years Soviet Armenian writers have been 
creating a new literature, very much Armenian in spirit and form, using the rich 
folklore and treasury of art of their country as its foundation. A third article, by 
A. Adamian and V. I5eznuni, in the "Books and Reviews" section of the next issue of 
Armenian Affairs, will bring the subject up to date, particularly from the standpoint 
of the number and variety of books pubHished in the Armenian Soviet Republic 
since 1946. 

From America to Armenia 

By K. SiTAL 


RMENIA is the proud possessor of a very old and glorious culture. This cul- 
ture is second to none both in its achievements and in the great influence it has 
exerted upon the civilization and progress of mankind. 

This fact has been recognized by many outstanding European scholars and 
intellectuals. Now this great cultural inheritance of Armenia has become the 
pride and the priceless treasure of all the peoples of the Soviet Union. 

After long centuries of untold suffering and of heroic struggle, once more, 
the Armenian people became the proud masters of their own destiny. This was 
thirty odd years ago. 

A new era of creative achievements had dawned upon the worthy people 
of Armenia. 

Since then, in an atmosphere of reconstruction and enthusiasm, the for- 
tunate writers of free Armenia have been creating a wholesome and new litera- 
ture — very much Armenian in style and spirit and yet universal in content and 
appeal. The unique treasury of the national art and culture and the rich and 
colorful folklore were widely utilized in the making of this new and vigorous 

It was a convention of these Armenian wTiters that I had the rare fortune 
of attending in Yerevan, Soviet Armenia. It started on September 25 and ended 
on October 1, 1946. 



The purpose was to evaluate the new hterature, to discover its shortcom- 
ings and the ways and means of making it effective as an instrument of service 
to the people. There were present two hundred forty members of Soviet Ar- 
menia's Writers' Union. A number of non-members were also present. Ten 
had come as guests from abroad. There were also Armenian representatives from 
republics of Azerbaijan and Georgia. A notable group had come from Russia 
and Estonia. Two leading Georgian writers were also present. 

Armenian literature, both old and new, can be better appreciated with 
reference to the geography and history of the land which gave it birth ; and the 
new may not be understood without reference to the old. Any description of the 
Convention and discussion of the problems raised there may become more mean- 
ingful to the reader if the relation of the old to the new and the relation of both 
to the geography and history of the land are indicated. 


The physical environment of a country, its climate and geographical 
characteristics leave their impression upon the culture and art of the people. This 
is especially true of Armenia, with its lofty mountains and fertile valleys ; its sap- 
phire-blue lakes and swift foaming rivers ; its long, severe winters, slowly unfolding 
springs, hot dry summers in the valleys and plains, and the cool, flower-bedecked 
fields in the mountains, and its brief, mellow, but fruitful autumns. Armenia 
is also a land of flowers and birds: with its more than two thousand distinct 
varieties of flowers, and its great number and variety of birds, it is no wonder 
that legend places the old Garden of Eden in Armenia, 

This rugged and beautiful setting has left its deep, everlasting impression 
upon every phase of Armenian art and literature, as upon the other aspects of 
the life of the people. 

Many peoples have mingled their blood with that of this ancient people. 
Eleven hundred years before our era we find Armenia a well-civilized country 
with a flourishing culture and a vast system of irrigation. 

Its geographical position has made the Armenian plateau both a source 
of misfortune to its people and a bridge over which the cultural heritage of the 
East and West have trafficked back and forth — an endless battleground and the 
crossroads of many civilizations. Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Macedonians, 
Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Mongols, Seljuks and Ottoman Turks have over- 
run it and drenched the soil with blood. And yet, despite the repeated visitation 
of death and the destruction of the great works of art — valuable books and 
manuscripts, beautiful shrines and magnificent edifices — the creative genius of the 
Armenian p-eople has continued to reassert itself each time in the field of art, 
architecture, literature, music and the handicrafts. 

Long before the Christian era the Armenians recognized the value of Hel- 
lenism and became its protagonists in the Near East. 



Armenia was also the first nation to adopt Christianity — at least ten years 
before Constantine gave it official recognition. This was followed by the Golden 
Age of Armenian Hterature. 

There are quite a number of Armenian translations of the Greek masters, 
the originab of which have been lost. It is through these translations that the 
cultural world today is in possession of some of these works. 

The Armenian renascence started about the middle of the tenth century 
by the great poet and mystic Gregory of Narek. It extended to the realm of 
architecture, painting and literature. 


In the field of lyric poetry, which had such an abundant harvest among 
the Armenians, two great bards stand out — Kouchak in the sixteenth century and 
Sayat-Nova in the eighteenth century. Anatole France and Valery Brusov have 
claimed Kouchak to be the greatest poet in the expression of the simple and burn- 
ing emotion of love. Sayat-Nova was the court poet and singer of Tamara, the 
glamorous queen of Georgia. He wrote and sang in three languages with equal 
ease — Armenian, Georgian, and Azerbaijan. He is highly appreciated by all 
three peoples and his fame is widespread throughout the Soviet Union, his poetry 
having been translated into nearly every language of the constituent republics 
of the Union. 

The last great pre-Soviet Armenian writers were Shirvanzade and Tuman- 
ian. Both of them saw the liberation of their land, the fulfillment of the dream 
of their people. They died contentedly, loved and honored by all — ^the people of 
their land and of the other republics of the Soviet Union, to whom their works 
have been made accessible. To the same generation of great writers belongs 
Avetik Isahakian, the poet-laureate of Armenia, greatly admired in all parts of 
the Soviet Union, whom Alexander Blok in 1916 characterized as "a first 
class poet," adding that perhaps there was "no other inspired and original poet 
like him in all Europe." 

The folklore of the Armenian people is rich, beautiful, diversified and revo- 
lutionary. The national epic of Armenia, Daredevils of, Sassoun or David of 
Sassoun, was unknown outside of Armenia until very recently. In 1939 the 
many of its variants which had been passed on from generation to generation 
for scores of centuries^ were collected, compiled and published in two great 

IThe one thousandth anniversary of the epic of David of Sassoun was celebrated in Armenia 
in 1939. A considerable part of this great and old epic goes back to the days when the 
Armenians were pagans. That is the part of "Sanasar" and "Baghdasar." The present inter- 
pretation is that this great epic has been started in the far antiquity and gradually has grown 
to its present form. As there is a section which goes way back to our pagan period there is 
also a section of epic that belongs to this time, which is very recent, when the craftsmen 
became an important section of our people. Little Meher is a creation of this group and he 
represents the aspirations of a people who have passed through every stage of social orders 
up to the present one. 



volumes. Special committees were formed in various parts of the Soviet Union 
for the purpose of having it translated into the many languages of the peoples of 
the constituent republics. It was received with great enthusiasm everywhere, its 
heroes inspiring courage and hope during the critical days of the second World 

David of Sassoun is an original folk-creation, devoid of hatred, permeated 
with the spirit of freedom and brotherhood. The story has no end — it is projected 
into a happy and bright future of humanity. According to it, its last hero, Little 
Meher, is still alive. With his fiery horse and sword of lightning he is waiting for 
action on the day when the oppressed peoples will rise and destroy the unhappy 
old world of suffering and sorrow and establish in its place a new order of life, 
when grains of wheat will be as large as walnuts, barley will grow the size of 
berries, and com will be of gold. 

Kashti Kadcher (The Braves of Kasht) is another great epic which bubbles 
with refreshing humor, bravery and tenderness. It is a tale of partisan warfare 
of the freedom loving Armenians and their neighbors, the Kurds, led by the 
invincible warriors of Kasht, who rise against the hordes of Tamur Khan. 
Tamur Khan fails to conquer these people. He is out-maneuvered and out- 
generalled by them. His armies are crushed and he is captured and put to 
death. The survivors of Tamur's once great army were advised to return to their 
homeland and live their own lives there. In this epic Tamur Khan is not a 
real, historic person but a symbol of tyranny. 

Nearly all Armenian folk stories end with hope for a better world. One of 
the most charming of these stories is that of Hazaran Bulbiil (The Immortal 
Nightingale). The hero of the tale is the youngest of the three sons of a poor 
gardener who after untold sufferings and incredible exploits succeeds in securing 
this magic bird. Under its enchanting strains the garden blooms and spreads 
down into the valleys and all over the countryside. Under its magic strains the 
old become young, strong, wise, noble and immortal, and happiness becomes 
their perennial, all-embracing lot. 

These epics and folk stories present a symbolic picture of Armenia, past 
and present. 


Since 1920 Armenia has been experiencing a new renascence. With the 
peace and security which has come with the establishment of Soviet order a new 
day has dawned in this land of suffering and death, with unparalleled oppor- 
tunities to its people to shape their life and destiny in accordance with their 
traditions and desires. 

Armenia enjoys today a cultural growth unique in its long and glorious 
history. A major credit for this goes to the nationalities policy of Joseph 
Stalin, and his personal interest and intimate knowledge of Armenian culture. 



Some time prior to the second World War a delegation of intellectuals from 
Armenia who were \'isiting the great leader were astounded by his thorough knowl- 
edge of Armenian culture. Upon learning from the head of the group that the 
scientific textbooks of the University of Armenia were not in the Armenian 
language, because of certain technical difficulties, he called attention to the wealth 
and adaptability of their language and suggested that a serious attempt be 
made to correct this flaw in the scientific education of Armenian youth. As a 
result all textbooks used in Armenia, including those in the field of science, are 
in the Armenian language. 

Illiteracy has been wiped out in Armenia, and a network of public schools, 
theaters, opera houses, libraries, museums and institutions of higher learning 
cover the land. The enormous manuscript wealth of Armenia is housed in the 
Matenadaran, the national library of manuscripts in Yerevan which, with its more 
than fifteen thousand manuscripts and two hundred thousand other papers and 
documents, is the largest of its kind in the entire Soviet Union. Ten times as many 
have been destroyed by the invading hordes, have been carried away, and during 
the first World War have fallen into the destructive hands of the Turks. At 
present a five story building is under construction to house its ever increasing 
manuscript and rare book collection. 

Not only is the rich heritage of Armenia now being preserved through 
literary collections, research and special studies, but much has been added to it 
through the creative effort of the new generation of poets, novelists and dram- 
atists. The new art overflows with confidence, the spirit of brotherhood and a 
sense of destiny. 

The one-tenth of Armenia liberated and now a constituent republic of the 
Soviet Union is a place of pilgrimage for Soviet scholars and intellectuals, who 
consider its priceless ancient heritage an integral part of the culture of the entire 
Soviet Union. Many of these intellectuals make annual visits to Armenia and 
spend considerable time studying its history, archeology, art and other cultural 
resources. They were represented at the second convention of Soviet Armenian 


The impressive opening of the Convention took place at the State Opera 
House ; Avetik Isahakian, the patriarch of Armenian poetry, presiding. 

The Secretary of the Writers' Union, Gregorian, gave an interesting report 
of Soviet Armenian literature to date. He outlined the astonishing economic and 
industrial progress in Soviet Armenia, and indicated how this had been reflected 
in the new art and literature, characterized as these are by a healthy social 
realism. Gregorian illustrated his theme by showing how the early revolutionary 
temper of the masses had found expression in the fiery poems of the great poet 



Charentz and many other writers. He enumerated some of the leading works 
given to themes of the reconstruction and the social and industrial progress under 
the new order — among them Zarian's Rushani Karap (The Dyke of Rushan), 
Zorian's Espitak Kaghak (The White City), Demirjian's Fosjorayeen Tsolker 
(Phosphorous Rays), and the works of Abov, Sarian, Sarmen, Tarontzy, Shiraz, 
and Borian. He pointed out that during the recent great war both the old and 
the new generations of Armenian writers had done much through prose and 
poetry on patriotic themes to inspire the people to victory. Outstanding among 
the historical novels of this period are the Vardanantz of Demirjian and Pap 
Tagavor (King Pap) of Zorian. 

Gregorian also discussed the shortcomings of some writers, criticizing such 
unhealthy manifestations in their works as defeatism, pessimism and unsocial 
ideas, and their inability to understand the new Soviet generation of men and 
women. He urged Armenian writers to utilize the great cultural heritage of their 
people and to create new themes and new heroes out of the events and experi- 
ences of the war. They should, he added, be able also to sing of the exploits of 
the heroes of labor on the production front, the work of reconstruction of the 
present day, and the great destiny of the fatherland. 

The writers attending the Convention were then treated with a most im- 
pressive recital of music, song and dance. A vioHn orchestra of some fifty-five 
children, of eight and nine years of age, from a music school, created a sensation 
with their playing. 

In my youth I had seen this section of Armenia. It was a backward, miser- 
ably, neglected province of Tsarist Russia. I could not help but marvel, there- 
fore, at the miracle that had taken place within the short period of twenty-five 
years. The once poverty-stricken, starving people of Armenia had generated 
a new world for themselves. They had obliterated the nightmare of the past 
forever and were looking forward to a glorious future with unbounded courage 
and assurance. 

This portion of Armenia was no longer a backward, rural area, but a 
highly industrialized modem country. In place of the miserable, malaria-in- 
fested, muddy old Yerevan, a magnificent metropolis with a population of three 
hundred and twenty-five thousand had risen. Wide, tree-laned boulevards, 
beautiful parks, graceful and imposing public buildings, and attractive new 
apartment houses were characteristic features of the new capital. This magic 
transformation was evident everywhere in this once poor, tortured and backward 
land of Ararat. The recital itself was being given in the new opera house, a jewel 
of Armenian architecture, which could be the pride of any great city of our day. 

Many of the younger writers had grown up within the present period of 
struggle, creation and construction, within the new economy and culture which 
has undergirt with security and opportunity their homeland, and their own 
lives and careers. 




The Convention continued for five days in the beautiful and spacious Phil- 
harmonic Hall. All seats were filled at all sessions ; and admission was by ticket ! 
No doubt many times the number of those attending would have been present 
if the space had permitted. 

The ministers of the government, the members of the Armenian Academy, 
leading artists, educators, and students followed the addresses and reports with 
keen interest. Papers were presented by leading writers about the new prose, 
drama and poetry; about the press; about the problems of the Armenian lan- 
guage; and about Armenian literature abroad. 

Writers criticized by the Secretary and by other speakers were given ample 
time to present their points of view. Some of them answered back with a bar- 
rage of counter-criticism against those who criticized them. Here was an amazing 
spectacle of freedom of expression, and open criticism even by lesser writers of 
the literary works of the distinguished masters. It was a most moving experience 
to witness famous writers rise and with humility and courage indulge in a bout 
of self-criticism, with the audience disagreeing with a burst of applause in 
appreciation of their work and service. 

The convention as a whole was a picture of intellectual honesty, character 
and strength, magnanimity, self-confidence, and harmony of purpose. 

The Russian and Georgian delegations seemed to be well acquainted with 
various phases of Armenian literature, the work of individual writers, and the 
problems confronting them. 

Nikolai Tikhonov, the famous warrior-poet and defender of Leningrad, 
in a moving address paid high tribute to Armenian Hterature which, he said, 
"possessed a poetry of the highest order and an equally famous prose, a literature 
permeated with the spirit of patriotism and the impulse of public service. That 
much was made very clear when the Armenian people fought for their inde- 
pendence. It is as clear today." Tikhonov then reminded the convention that 
during the war one-third of all Armenian writers were at the front, many of 
whom laid down their lives so that others could live in peace and freedom. Now, 
he continued, writers were on a new front where every good book was a battle 
won, where each victory meant greater prosperity and happiness for the people. 

The year before, the Armenian government had decided to repatriate the 
Armenians abroad, those victims of the First World War who had been driven 
from their homes by the Turkish massacres and depredations. There have been 
over one million of those unfortunates in the countries of the Near East, the 
Balkans, France, and elsewhere. There was an important colony of Armenian 
immigrants in the interior of Iran, who had been taken there in 1605 by Shah 
Abbas I. At the time of the convention over sixty thousand repatriates had 



arrived and were being established in new homes and jobs. This was the occasion 
of greajt enthusiasm and rejoicing. 

The physical reunion of the Armenian nation was being forged, and it was 
considered imperative that there should also be a union on the cultural front. 
The convention dwelt on this subject a great deal. 

Throughout the conference prevailed a deep sense of the responsibility and 
the necessity of relating literature to the current needs and future goals of the 
social order and the nation. It ended on a note of the importance of social 
realism in literature in general, and the necessity of creating new types of peace- 
time heroes who would embody in particular the aims and ideas of the new 

From Moscow to Yerevan 

By Professor A. Arsharuni 

IJrGENT business had kept me in Moscow, and I keenly regretted that I left 
the capital too late to attend the Second Congress of Soviet Armenian writers. 

When I arrived at the airdrome in the morning to board a plane for 
Yerevan I was told that the timetable had been changed for the winter. This 
meant that our plane would not arrive in Yerevan on the same day but on the 

It was almost midday when we left Rostov-on-Don where we had spent the 
night. The Rostov winds and later a thick fog had delayed us. But as soon 
as we found ourselves over the Black Sea coast the warm southern sun, clear 
sky and sparkling expanse of sea made us forget the cold and fog which we had 
left behind in the north. 

At five o'clock, local time, we landed at the airdrome of Georgia's capital, 
Tbilisi. Here every house, every tree was familiar. In the days of the heroic 
defense of the Caucasus we had landed at this airdrome more than once and 
then boarded a plane for Moscow. Then everything was grim — the men in 
uniform, the general situation, even nature itself. Now, the very sunshine seemed 
different, and so did the spirits of the people. 

From this point our plane took off for its last lap on its flight to Yerevan. 
It is only an hour's flight, but I shall never forget that hour in the air, over 



Soviet Armenia. I have travelled by air frequently under extremely difficult 
conditions, often have I had moments of joy and delight, but the thrills of that 
hour were something I had never experienced before. 

The golden autumn lay over the land and harvesting was in progress in the 
fields. The sun was sinking between the hills, lengthening and deepening their 
shadows. Momentarily the earth and the hiUs changed in color, taking on new 
and radiant shades. Below us lay Lori, the birth-place of Tumanian. There 
were the Alaverdi Copper Works spread out beneath us. We knew our geography 
without the aid of maps, and could pick out the different objects at the sight 
of small and insignificant signs. Each one of us, glued to his window, gazed 
hungrily at the inimitable panorama of Armenia. Slowly, very slowly, the 
pictures passed out of sight to be replaced by others. Suddenly, almost simul- 
taneously, all the passengers uttered the one word sacred to all Armenians — 

That majestic, time-honored mountain of our homeland — the literary 
genius is not yet bom who may do justice to it in that sunset hour. In love with 
it ever since my childhood I have read everything written about it, from the 
ancient historians down to the young writers of our day. I hope I may be for- 
given when I say that Mount Ararat still awaits its Petrarch. Wrapped in a 
silvery cloak, the lower edges of which were turning into gold, the eternal snow 
sparkling with a thousand lights, Ararat appeared like a magic lantern beckon- 
ing all to come nearer. 

On the right we could distinglish the outlines of the rock of Alagoz,^ whose 
enchanting lines make it difficult to decide whether it was the poet or the 
mountain which immortalized the other. One thing is indisputably clear: 
Isahakian instilled a tender, lyrical love of Alagoz in our generation, not the 
heroic Ararat lauded by Raphael Patkanian, or the Ararat of Raffi or even 
Alishan, but the lyrical Alagoz of Isahakian. 

On the left Lake Sevan lay hidden among the hills, peacefully wrapped in 
the rays of the setting sun. 

There is no doubt that Ararat was beautiful centuries ago. Our ancestors 
were aware of the loveliness of Lake Sevan and the tender glory of Alagoz. And 
Zangezur, the historical Siunik of which we gained a bird's-eye-view, was duly 
lauded by our historians. But there was something new in our situation. Having 
learned to fly, we were now able to take in the whole of Armenia at one glance. 
Although in itself this was remarkable, the heart of this question lay in some- 
thing else. Every object that we saw, every name that came to our minds as the 
plane winged its way to Yerevan carried with it more than an historical or 
geographical connotation ; it stood for our struggle and progress. 

lA volcanic mountain in Soviet Armenia, also known as Mt. Aragadz, 13,435 ft. high ; not to 
be confused with Mt. Ararat, the higher of whose two peaks is 16,696 ft. high, about 22 miles 
beyond Yerevan, within the political bounds of modern Turkey. — Ed. 



Lake Sevan to the left sheltered by the great range of hills, for example, 
did not only mean poetry and lyricism but the radical reconstruction of the 
national economy. Seven powerful hydro-electric stations would be erected, to 
work by the cheap water-power supplied by Lake Sevan. The Giumush hydro- 
electric station would be put into operation in the course of the five-year plan. 
The waters of Sevan would provide the cheapest electric energy to Armenia's 
industry and agriculture, and would also serve for irrigation purposes. That all 
this would come to pass was evinced by the fact that the Armenian people were 
hard at work, developing and transforming the national economy in accordance 
with the new five-year plan. 

Through the settling dusk we could see the lights of Zangezur. It was, not 
then yet known as an industrial center but was soon to become famous far 
beyond the bounds of the Soviet Union. Work was already progressing here on 
the construction of a molybdenum-copper trust,^ which was to be one of the 
largest construction projects of the five-year plan. In mineral supplies and 
prospects for future development, the Kadjeran works were to take a leading 
place among the industrial enterprises of its type in the world. 

From the air we could see the construction sites which would be completed 
within the next few years. 

And now beneath us lay Yerevan, the capital of Armenia, wrapped in the 
settling twilight, with the sun lost behind the hills. Soon we were down and in 
the bus, on our way to the warm and quiet city at eventide. 


When we arrived in Lenin Square in the center of the city, I learned that 
only three of the passengers were residents of Yerevan. The three of us, two 
men and one woman, resolved to go to a hotel. The woman was Lithuanian 
by nationality, born in Sukhumi, and now worked in Moscow as a synthetic 
rubber expert and was coming to Yerevan to help the local synthetic rubber 
plant solve a number of production problems. The man was an old friend, a 
lawyer by profession, brother of the prominent Armenian public figure and 
writer, Alexander Miasnikian-Martuni. The Intourist Hotel was nearby and 
our luggage was taken there. 

We walked down Abovian Boulevard, the street chosen by the youth for 
promenading, as is done in most southern towns. Abovian is really a beautiful 
thoroughfare, beginning with the fine buildings of the University, the Public 
Library, the Matenadaran and other research institutes, and further down the 
bright lights of picture theaters, the House of Musical Comedy, the Philharmonic, 
concert and lecture halls, and athletic and sports establishments. 

2In Armenian this word, spelled trest, does not suggest what it does in the United States, 
namely, a private monopoly, but merely the combination of several enterprises which are 
related in production, or the exploitation of raw materials. — Ed. 



The working day was over and merry groups were gathering in front of 
the cinemas, theaters and concert halls. 

In Yerevan there are altogether seven theaters for adults and young people. 
They present plays in the Armenian, Russian and Azerbaijan languages. Seven 
professional theaters working in three languages ! That is an achievement for a 
country the size of our repubhc ; but already the need was felt for more theaters 
and the construction of new, modern and comfortable premises for the existing 
ones. This was already accompHshed in the case of the Spendiarov Opera 

Yerevan at night is a city of light. It is thoroughly electrified. It was to be 
even more so by the end of the five-year plan in 1950, when the whole series of 
power stations on the Sevan cascade would be in operation. 

Further down Abovian Boulevard we came to the monumental Government 
Palace, the last work of architect Academician Tamanian. In front of this 
beautiful edifice spreads a square, flanked by monuments to Lenin and Shahum- 
ian,^ where the air is filled with the scent of flowers and the soft murmur of 
fountains and youthful laughter. 

If you want to see Ararat by moonlight you must turn to the left from the 
Shahumian monument to Mikoyan Prospect or walk up Stalin Prospect, and the 
silvery hood of the mountain will loom in sight. In Yerevan itself the moonlight 
is drowned by the bright electric lights. 

In the square, loud-speakers were broadcasting a concert, followed by the 
news. We stood and waited to hear the Kremlin clock strike midnight, thrilled 
that at that hour the entire country listened to the chimes from Moscow. Quietly, 
without much speaking, we continued our walk in the midnight hours through 
the streets of Yerevan. 

Each one of us had been here during the war : and although this was already 
the second post-war year, we were eager for first impressions of the city in 

SStepan Shahumian, the famous Armenian "professional" revolutionary leader, friend 
of Lenin and Stalin, was born on October 1 (13), 1878 in Tiflis. After graduating from the 
"realschule" of Tiflis in 1898 he went to Riga for his higher education, where he enrolled in 
the department of chemistry of the politechnic institute. In 1900 he entered the ranks of the 
revolutionary movement, for which reason he was expelled from the institute, March 1, 1902. 
Later the same year he was accepted in the faculty of philosophy of the University of Berlin. 

In 1903 Shahumian met Lenin in Switzerland, and soon after rose to a position of leader- 
ship in the Russian revolutionary movement. Back in Tiflis in 1905 and elsewhere later he 
worked with Stalin and others on many projects, translating, writing, editing papers, organiz- 
ing, working with labor unions. He was imprisoned and exiled several times. In 1917 and 1918, 
having returned from his last exile, he became very active in the revolutionary movement in 
the Transcaucasus, which ended when he and twenty- five other commissars were killed (Sep- 
tember 20, 1918) at Krasnovodsk, on the Caspian Sea, by the British and other counter- 
revolutionary forces in that area. 

In 1906 Shahumian published as a separate volume his The National Question and Social 
Democracy, which previously had appeared in the newspaper Kaidz- Several of his collected 
works have appeared since his death. The latest work in Armenian is St. Shahumian, Enteer 
Terker, 1902-1918 (Stepan Shahumian, Selected Works, 1902-1918), Yerevan, Hai-pet-hrat, 
1948, 72 Ip. A more complete collected work has been in preparation for some time.— ^rf. 



We were struck by the affability, the cordiality of the people of Yerevan. 
Any question directed at any stranger on the street would bring readily an 
accurate, polite, warm reply. Sometimes almost sharp tones of conversation 
would lead one to think that the Yerevanites were abrupt and aggressive; but 
intimate knowledge of them would soon correct the impression. Their speech 
is full of endearing terms. "Enker-Dchan" (dear [soul] friend) is heard at every 
turn of the conversation : and it is not uttered lightly, but with the warmest 

On our way back to the hotel we passed by the statue of the great Armenian 
writer, Khachatur Abovian, who died a little over a hundred years ago. He 
lives in the hearts of Soviet Armenians. The sculptor depicted him in a thought- 
ful mood, in a slightly stooping pose. Life had been harsh to him and there was 
much to ponder over. And now the musing spectator would want to say to him : 
"It is time to straighten your back, to raise your head ! Look around and see your 
youthful, energetic successors, who are fulfilling your dreams and realizing 
your unfinished work." 

When we arrived at the hotel it was still thronged with people, in spite of 
the late hour. Tomorrow would be a busy day filled with new and interesting 


The Congress of Soviet Armenian writers had closed before we arrived at 
Yerevan. A number of the delegates, chiefly those from the constituent repub- 
lics, had left the city. Guests from abroad were also preparing to leave. 

It was an October morning. I stepped out of the hotel into a sun-flooded 
street, and made my way to the Writers' Club. There, in one of the spacious 
rooms on the second floor, I was soon lost in conversation with a group of 
Armenian writers, many of whom were old friends. Some of them I had not 
seen or heard of since the beginning of the war ; others I had not seen only since 
the end of the war ; and still others I had met comparatively recently in Moscow. 
The only one missing was Avetik Isahakian who was detained at home by illness. 
I met him later. 

Derenik Demirjian had somewhat aged physically, but his creative genius 
burned as brightly as ever. People's Artist Vagarsh Vagarshian told us of the 
witty dialogue in one of Demirjian's unfinished plays. Soon the two parts of 
his historical novel, Vardanank, appeared in a single volume. They were com- 
pleted during the war. Demirjian had worked on it for thirty years, starting on it 
in the days when he wrote his play, Vasak. 

The editor of the book told us that Demirjian had made a number of im- 
portant corrections, not in the plot, but in the style of the first part. 

Movses Arazi, the prose writer, had hardly changed. Recently, he had 
published a volume of selected short stories. Towards the end of our conver- 



sation he called me to one side and asked : "I was told by the playwright Saga- 
telian that when he was in your home he had read a letter from Gorky in which 
the great Russian writer praised one of my short stories." 

I confirmed that this was so. In a letter dated 1928 and addressed to the 
editorial offices of Soviet Land Gorky had praised one of Arazi's stories in a few, 
fervent words. Gorky had read the story in a Russian translation. The letter 
was in my file, and I promised Arazi to send a photostat copy of it to the Museum 
of Literature. 

It was pleasant to meet Sergei Payazat, talented writer and playwright, 
with whom my friendship started ten years ago. During the war I was in- 
formed that he had died at the front. A year ago, however, I was overjoyed 
to learn that Payazat was alive. I saw him now with my own eyes. 

A spirit of outright frankness had prevailed at the proceedings of the Con- 
gress in evaluating the achievements of the past, appraising the current trends, 
and forecasting the path which lay ahead. The delegates were in a hopeful, joy- 
ous, enthusiastic mood, each eager to make his distinctive contribution to the 
creation of the new literature. 

Christofer Tapaltsian, a talented novelist and master of style, had begun 
a lengthy novel about the Armenian intelligentsia before the war, which was 
ready for the printer when the war broke out. On his return from the Caucasus 
at the end of the war Tapaltsian revised his manuscript. Since then he has 
published the first comprehensive work on that subject in the Armenian language. 

Bagrat Staffi, writer in prose, was publishing a lengthy novel on the life of 
Stepan Shahumian, on which he had been working for many years. I had the 
good fortune to read it in manuscript form. Until then he had been known for 
his sketches and short stories. 

Three of our talented young poets, Hovhannes Shiraz, Ashot Grashi, and 
Georg Emin each had published a volume of poems. Although their work 
may be variously appraised, they have this one indisputable thing in common : 
they all started their literary careers ten years ago, developed and matured to- 
gether, and now hold an honorable place in Armenian literature. Their books 
are eagerly sought by the public. 

Mekrtich Koriun, the indefatigable writer for children, whose unbounded 
energy and persistence is the wonder of the Armenian literary world, had pub- 
lished a volume of fables and fairy-tales, a little book of plays for children, and 
was then working on a story about the famous Kamo. 

In the Writers' Club I was also introduced to the representatives of Ar- 
menians from abroad who had attended the Congress. . Their recent books, pub- 
lished abroad, were on display with the rest of the literature of Armenian writers 
made available at the Congress. As a further evidence of the interchange of 
ideas, friendly contacts, and strengthening and deepening of intellectual ties, 
I saw how these delegates, on leaving Armenia to return to their respective 



countries, loaded themselves with books written by their compatriots in Armenia. 
I myself, who routinely receive all the latest books published in the Armenian 
language, was to carry back with me to Moscow a heavy precious load of the 
works of my Armenian friends. 

It is not possible within the brief compass of this article to relate my im- 
pressions and many contacts. This much, however, must be stressed, that Ar- 
menian writers, after their full participation in the bloodiest war in history, had 
gained a deeper insight into life than ever, and were writing with enthusiasm, 
fully aware of the importance of their role in the work of reconstruction which 
lay ahead. Many of those I met on that day in the Writers' Club had fought 
in the ranks of the Soviet Army — Siras, Kochar, Borian, Tapaltsian, Payazat. 
Those writers who had remained in the rear had helped the front with their 
work. Now, in the post-war period they were all working together to heal the 
wounds and develop further the young, but strong republic. 


One rainy evening a group of us attended a special convention on the history 
of the Armenian theater at the Institute of the History of Literature. As a sec- 
tion of the Armenian Academy of Sciences, the Institute had drawn up a plan to 
publish the history of the Armenian theater. For a period of two years theater 
experts had been at work on this project. They were to make a preliminary 
report on their work at this convention. The convention which lasted for two 
days heard many other papers and reports. 

That same year plans were being made to celebrate the two thousandth 
anniversary of the Armenian theater. What interested me most, however, was 
the modem Armenian theater. 

Yerevan at that time had seven theaters — the Sundukian Dramatic Theater, 
the Spendiarov Opera House, the Russian Theater named after Stanislavsky, 
the Azerbaijan Theater named after Djafar Djabarly, the House of Musical 
Comedy, the Youth Theater and the Puppet Theater. 

Twenty-six years prior to that date there was not a single permanent pro- 
fessional theater in Yerevan. Indeed, throughout the whole of the Tsarist period 
there were perhaps only two or three professional Armenian theater troupes. In 
1946, however, there were thirty theaters as well as a theatrical institute with 
four faculties, a theatrical museum, a theatrical society and a theatrical section 
in the Institute of the History of Literature of the Armenian Academy of Sciences. 
To this should be added the Philharmonic Society, the concerts, and the variety 

The author of this article was privileged to lecture on the theater in the 
Writers' Union, the Theatrical Institute, the Theatrical Society and to theater 



What were playwrights, producers, actors then working on? What do play 
audiences want? The basic theme which holds the attention of all is the man 
of our time. 

Let me explain. The classic works of Armenian, Russian and West-European 
playwrights have won favor with the Armenian theater-goer. Continuing the 
honored traditions of the great Armenian actors of the past, the Armenian theater 
has bred in the public a love of classical plays. But in the more than twenty-five 
years that have passed the estabHshment of the Armenian state, a modern 
repertoire has been created. The heroes and fighters of the Revolution, the 
builders of the new state, constitute the themes of modern Armenian plays. 

When we speak of the contemporaneous in modern Armenian drama, 
however, we have in mind more particularly the events and heroes of the 
war and the post-war period. 

The victory over fascism, the reconstruction as outhned in the new five-year 
plan, the people of the Soviet state and era — ^these are not trite themes. They are 
qualitatively new : and their distinguishing features set them apart from the 
ordinary. To dramatize such an era on the stage, to portray its people and their 
heroic deeds, to rear the growing generation in the romanticism of great feats, 
to raise the self-esteem of the theater-goer — that is what the public wants from 
the theater. 

The play, The Monastery Gorge, is a case in point. The events in it relate 
to the days when a mortal fight was in progress against the fascist invaders in 
the Caucasus. The action is staged in an Armenian collective farm from which 
all the grown men have gone to defend the homeland — the future fate of the 
country, the people, the state itself being the issue not only at the front but also 
back home in the village. 

In 1 946 the play had been running for two years on the stage of the leading 
Armenian theater. It had been translated into Russian and was soon to appear 
on the stages of the theaters of the fraternal republics. 

Who constitute the main theater-going public ? This is difficult to answer, for 
in all the theaters of Yerevan I saw people from all vocations. The young people 
were in preponderance. 

After performances it was pleasant to walk out of the theater leisurely and 
hsten to the ardent discussions among the audience about the play, the acting, 
and the stage. 

Which theater is the most popular? The one which stages plays that have 
won the public, as for instance Chukhajian's opera Arshak II, the presentation 
of which made theater history. Theater-goers wait impatiently for the nights 
on which this opera is presented. The people respond to great ideas artistically 
presented. Several thousands attend the Yerevan theaters every night. As many 
go to the cinema. Scientists and artists have their own evenings nearly every day. 

Culture and entertainment of the highest order are a prerogative of night 
life in Yerevan. 




One bright morning in late October a group of scientific workers made 
their way to the "city of science" — the section of Yerevan where the university, 
the institutes, the pubhc Ubrary, the Matenadaran and other scientific and cul- 
tural institutions are centered. Some were hurrying to attend lectures at the 
university, others were on their way to a meeting of the senate, still others to 
work in the pubUc Hbrary. Someone pointed to a tall, slightly stooped figure of 
an old man on the other side of the street — Garegin Levonian. 

For fifty-four years this son of the famous bard Djivani has been engaged 
in research in art, the theater, the history of the press and folklore. He works 
intensively, with extraordinary enthusiasm and productivity. Levonian has won 
fame and recognition for himself by his many researches and scholarly publica- 
tions. He is most remembered for his Gegharvest (Art). Excusing myself from 
my companions I hurried to the other side of the street to catch up with the 
elderly scientist. He recognized me at once and took my hand with joy. Walk- 
ing together slowly uphill he asked me whether I had seen his latest book. 

"Yes," I said, "I have even bought a copy." We were talking about his 
new book, Hai Geerke Tev Tpagrakan Arve$te (Armenian Book Making and 
Printer's Art), a scholarly work then just published. 
"And how is your health?" I inquired. 

"Not so well. I cannot say that it is due to old age. Men who are older 
than I, for instance, Yervand Shah-Aziz, work harder, but I do not work at 
full strength." 

Garegin Levonian is seventy-eight years old; Yervand Shah- Aziz, ninety- 
one ! Indeed Shah-Aziz works hard and with amazing productivity. How may 
one resist regarding this group of venerable scholars without envy? Other aged 
academicians who still vv^rote and published much then were Stepannos Mal- 
khasian,^ Hacob Manandian and Hratchya Ajarian. Younger scholars worked in 
honest competition with these venerable masters. 

Let me describe here briefly how Armenian scholars work, plan and execute 
their projects. 

The Institute of the History of Literature of the Armenian Academy of 
Sciences is headed by Khoren Sarkissian. It is beyond the scope of this article to 
go into the role and significance of this research institute. This much, however, 
needs to be said, that there are many organizational problems in the institute, 
as is the case of all such bodies, to which the director devotes a good portion of 
his time. Khoren Sarkissian's major achievements, however, lie in another di- 
rection. He is an active member of the Union of Writers, works much on prob- 
lems of modern Armenian literature, lectures on the history of literature in 
higher educational institutions, has edited the literary legacy of Academician 

^Now deceased. 



Manouk Abeghian, and devotes time to his own scientific investigations. Here is 
how he described his work-day : 

"Until 1 :00 p.m. I work on my manuscripts either at home or in the In- 
stitute — writing, editing, and so forth. Lectures, meetings, visitors, interviews, 
in short, all other matters I attend to in the afternoon and evening." 

During my 1946 visit to Yerevan he had just published a volume of essays 
on Soviet writers and their work during the war. 

I was present at a meeting of the senate of this Institute, held in connection 
with the two-thousandth anniversary of the Armenian theater. Khoren Sarkis- 
sian was in the chair, not only as director of the Institute but as leading authority 
on this subject, which indicates that the director himself takes an active part 
in the pursuit of the problems of scholarship alive at any time, working hard in 
the preparation of the sessions devoted to them. 

Khoren Sarkissian belongs to the middle generation of scholars, having 
acquired his learning in the years of Soviet rule. 

But there is a still younger generation, those who began their scientific 
career in the pre-war years, or even during the war. An outstanding represen- 
tative of this group is Aramais Mnatskanian, whom I met in Yerevan, whose 
successes and energy aroused my profound admiration. 

Before the war, he was the editor of the youth paper Avangard. The war 
years were spent at the front editing army newspapers in the Armenian language. 
He was with the army at Kerch and in the Caucasus. In 1946 he was engaged 
in scientific investigations in Yerevan. In the course of three or four meetings the 
young scholar outlined to me his research projects with great enthusiasm. While 
yet editing the newspapers for the war front, he had been busy planning for his 
future work. When the war ended he submitted a thesis for his master's degree 
in history. At the same time, he collected the data for a comprehensive work 
(of six-hundred pages) on The Armenian Front-line Press During the War. 
The value of this work is self evident. 

While in Tbilisi, Mnatskanian studied the archives of Alexander Myasni- 
kian-Martuni, prepared a plan for a monograph on him, and collected the 
necessary data. 

In addition to all this Mnatskanian had gathered all the necessary material 
for his future doctoral dissertation on "The Defense of the Caucasus in the 
Great War." 

Aramais Mnatskanian is not a unique case. He is merely an example of 
how scholars, old and young, are working eagerly and constructively in Soviet 
Armenia, striving to enhance the cause of the discovery of truth and of human 
happiness as they move from one achievement to another. In that kind of service 
they are finding the fullest joy and meaning of life for themselves and their fel- 
low men. 


A Brief Sketch of Armenian History 

Mainly from French Studies* 
By Vazkene Aykouni 



A fact of capital importance encouraged the Armenians to continue the 
fight for their independence. In the north, Russia planned to move towards the 
Caucasus and openly proclaimed herself "protector of the small Christian coun- 
tries." Moreover, the Armenians had never despaired. They firmly believed 
in the resurrection of their country. "The moral energy of nations," said Berg- 
son, "like that of individuals, is sustained only by an ideal superior and stronger 
than themselves, and to which they cling solidly when they feel their courage 
is wavering." The Armenians managed to maintain and nourish that ideal with 
their blood. In the mountainous regions they even succeeded in retaining a 
measure of national autonomy such as at Karabagh and in Zeitoun, Many local 
princes succeeded in governing their lands uncontested. 

The Armenian Church, on her part, encouraged movements of emanci- 
pation and exhorted the people to unite and drive out the hated enemy. 

In 1678, Catholicos Hacob IV held a council in Echmiadzin, the See of the 
Armenian Church, which was attended by a number of Meliks, members of the 
Armenian nobility in that region. The council resolved to appeal, through the 
Pope, to the western powers, to recover the independence of Armenia. A dele- 
gation headed by the Catholicos set out for Rome. But the Catholicos died in 
Constantinople, and the delegation disbanded. The young patriot, Israel Ori, 
only nineteen years old, who had been a member of the group, decided to carry 
on alone. He succeeded in getting the support of John-William, Prince of 
the Palatinate. 

Later, under Catholicos Nahapet I (1696-1705), successor of Hacob IV, 
a new mission was sent in the person of Israel Ori and Minass Vardapet, the 
head of the Monastery of St. James in Armenia, to Pope Innocent VII. 

After having visited the Holy Father and solicited his mediation, Ori and 
Minass Vardapet went to the court of John-William, where they were given a 
warm welcome. John- William commended them to the good will of Emperor 
Leopold I ; and the Emperor advised them to appeal also to Peter the Great. 
Peter promised his support (1699) for the liberation of Armenia. But with 

*Translated by Edward Nadir. 



Ori's death in 1711 the promises of Peter, who had had his hands full with his 
war with Charles XII of Sweden, came to a disappointing end.^ 

Later Russia declared war on Persia and sent an expeditionary force against 
her on October 1, 1722. Echmiadzin and a large part of Armenia had been un- 
der Persia for quite some time. At the signing of the peace treaty the following 
year, however, Armenia was left out. 

Abandoned to a cruel fate by friend and foe, Armenians took matters into 
their own hands, under the leadership of David Bek, the great Ajiiienian military 
and partisan leader.^* The revolt spread throughout Caucasian Armenia. In 
Karabagh the Meliks rallied around the cause for independence, which took 
the form of guerilla warfare and lasted for many years. 

The Turks, who had been on the watch, were not slow to jump in and fish 
in the troubled waters. They declared war on Persia and seized the provinces 
of Yerevan and Nakhichevan. These misfortunes, however, instead of muffling 
the spirit of the Armenians, reaffirmed in them the determination to resist op- 
pression and regain their liberty. They did not waiver for a moment even in 
the most critical period of their adversity. 

In 1768, during the Russo-Turkish war, Catherine the Great lavished on 
the Armenians promises for independence. False promises ! Armenia continued 
to bleed and suffer. In 1796 the entire population of Julfa was massacred by 
the Persians. The Russians intervened and forced the Persians beyond the Araxes 
River. The Treaty of Gulistan (1813) gave aU Transcaucasia to Russia. 

In 1826, however, Abbas Mirza, the eldest son of the Shah, led in a plot ; an 
armed band invaded the provinces ceded by the Gulistan Treaty. The Russians 
took counter measures. The Armenians joined forces, with the blessings of 
Nerses Ashtaraketzi, then Prelate of the Armenians in Georgia, later Catholicos 
of all the Armenians. The result was the Turkmanchai treaty of February 10, 
1828, which provided for the annexation of the provinces of Yerevan and 

lA fairly detailed account of the amazing one-man mission of Israel Ori and its results, 
cut short only by his untimely death, is to be found in Michael Varandian's Haikakan Sharzh- 
man Nakhapatmutiune (History of the Antecedents of the Armenian Awakening), Geneva, 
1912, Vol. I, chapter V. This two-volume Armenian work of Varandian is one of the best 
treatises on the history of the early struggles of the Armenians for freedom and inde- 
pendence. — Ed. 

la- The life and exploits of this great Armenian hero were filmed in 1944 in Yerevan, both 
in the Armenian and Russian languages. A good biographical sketch is to be found in 
H. Ajarian's Hayots Andsnanouneri Bararan (Biographical Dictionary of Armenians), Yerevan, 
Publication of the University, 1944, vol. II, pp. 59-62. Professor Ajarian lists the follow- 
ing biography on David Bek: Entir Patmoutiun David Bekeen Tev Paterazmats Hayots 
Khapanu (Select History of David Bek and of the Wars of the Armenians of Khapan), 
Vagharshapat, 1871 ; Rafii, Khamsayi Melikutiunnere (The Melikdoms [Principalities] of 
Khamsa), and his historical novel David Bek; Leo, Haik. tbagr., vol. II, pp. 351-383; 
M. Nersissian, "The Repercussions of David Bek's Movement in Vaspurakan and Neigh- 
boring Provinces," Teghek. Armfani, 1941, No. 5, pp. 73-75, concerning the meeting in 
1722 on the island of Lim, called for the purpose of planning the Armenian revolt in 
Vaspurakan. — Ed. 



Nakhichevan to Russia. That was an intimation of the kind of response Tsarist 
Russia was ready to give to the appeal of the Armenians for help in their struggle 
for independence. The project of an autonomous Armenia within Russia was 
unceremoniously buried by the Viceroy, Paskevich, who abolished all the privi- 
leges which had been previously granted the Armenians by Peter the Great and 
Catherine II. A new code, the Polozhenie (March 11-23, 1836), placed all 
their religious and national affairs under Russian control. The directing policy 
of Russia back of all this seemed to be the overall political and strategic interests 
of the empire. The Armenian plateau was necessary for the defense of the 
Caucasus, where the Armenians could be used to check the Georgians and the 
Turks. To the Armenians, nevertheless, the self-seeking domination of a far- 
flung Christian empire relatively new in the field was preferable to the unmitigated 
oppression of an ever-present Mohammedan neighbor, who also had been an 
ancient enemy. 

It was thus that when the Russians now marched against Turkey, and trans- 
formed another portion of Armenia to a theater of operations, the Armenians 
once more made common cause with them and extended them their unqualified 
support. Perhaps, they thought, not altogether unjustifiably, as has been amply 
demonstrated in the case of the Balkan nations, their long-hoped-for dream would 
be finally realized. They did not hope for long. The Treaty of Adrianople 
(1829), thanks to the intervention of the western powers and particularly 
England, covetous rival of Russia, saved the day for the Ottoman empire. The 
Turkish empire had been on the verge of collapse. General Diebitsch had cap- 
tured Varna, Silistra, and Adrianople in Europe, and General Paskevich had 
taken Kars and Erzeroum in Turkish Armenia. Even Constantinople would 
have gone to the Russians, had they not been restrained from taking it by con- 
siderations of foreign intervention. The French minister of foreign affairs, 
De Polignac had proposed the partition of the Turkish empire and a complete 
revamping of the map of Europe. The Treaty of Adrianople put an end to all 
this. Russia restored almost all her conquests in Turkey. With that the future 
of the Armenians in Turkey was worsened, since they had compromised their 
position with the Turks by their active sympathy for the Russian cause. 

Thereafter England tried to extend her protection to the Christian minori- 
ties in Turkey to counteract the Russian influence, but her interventions instead 
of mitigating the suffering of the Armenians brought upon them the worst 
calamities in their long and tortuous history. 

During the nineteenth century a strong autonomist movement in the 
Armenian colony in Constantinople, led by a group of young Armenian intel- 
lectuals who had completed their studies in Paris and returned home, alarmed 
the Turkish authorities. The "autonomists" sought a liberal constitution which 
would grant their communities the right to administer their own affairs. 

In 1839 Sultan Abdul Mejid had proclaimed the Hatt-i-Sherif of Gulhane, 

2See Aremenian Affairs^ Winter 1949-1950, Vol. I, no. 1, page 103. 

178 . 


the famous reforms known as the Tanzimat. Back of this was the Greek mas- 
sacres in Constantinople in 1821 and on the Island of Chios the following year, 
as a result of which Europe had demanded of the Turks the institution of reforms 
"without delay." 

Similarly, after the massacres of 1845 in Lebanon, and the subsequent 
pressure from Europe, the Sultan signed the Hatt-i-Humayun, a decree guaran- 
teeing freedom to all citizens without any distinction and affirming their equality 
before the law.^ The decree also gave to the non-Moslem communities in the 
empire the right to administer their affairs through representative bodies. To 
this end they were invited to submit to the government the reforms they deemed 

The Armenians elaborated an organic constitution,^ comprising ninety-nine 
articles, which was ratified by the Sultan Abdul Aziz (March 17, 1863), and 
put into effect at once. 

The hades or royal decrees promulgated with great fanfare, however, were 
to remain a dead letter. The Armenian Constitution did not prevent the Turkish 
and Kurdish bandits from oppressing the Armenians residing in the provinces 
of the interior. The European embassies in Constantinople were too far removed 
from the scene to be able to restrain the outbursts of violence against those whose 
security they had undertaken to safeguard. 

In 1867 the Sultan sent an army of 150,000 men to "appease" the town 
of Zeitoun, the Armenian "Montenegro," which had only 20,000 inhabitants, 
and which during the course of its late history had risen more than thirty times 
against the despotic rule of the Sultans. 

The Armenian National Assembly in Constantinople, created under the 
Constitution, in response to the many heart-rending reports of the despairing 
conditions in the interior of the country, submitted a strong protest to the Turk- 
ish Government. 

The Armenian question thus started to take shape. 


About the time Bosnia-Herzegovina rebelled against Turkey, Patriarch 
Varzhabedian appealed (December 7, 1876) to the British Ambassador in 
Constantinople, Sir Elliott, and informed him that uprisings in the Eastern 
provinces could be imminent if His Excellency thought this might help to bring 
the Armenian question to the attention of Europe. But would not such a 
rebellion bring about the immediate intervention of Russia? 

The Patriarch, while awaiting an answer — which he never received — filed 
complaints with the Turkish Government for the ills done to his people. This 
also was ignored, the Government attempting to stifle the demands. 

nbid., pp. 103-104, 

*Which is still in force today. 



In 1878, the year after the Russians had resumed hostilities against Turkey, 
when the parties had sat at San Stefano, a suburb of Constantinople, to draw a 
peace treaty, Patriarch Varzhabedian, in full accord with the Armenian Na- 
tional Assembly, made a supreme appeal on behalf of his people to Grand Duke 
Nicholas. The Grand Duke, impressed with the case of the Armenians, appealed 
in turn to his brother. Tsar Alexander II, and obtained the insertion of a special 
clause in their favor in the ensuing treaty. In effect. Article XVI of this instru- 
ment said : 

As the evacuation by the Russians of the territories they had occupied in 
Armenia, which are to be returned to Turkey, could be the cause of conflicts 
and complications detrimental to the good relations between the two coim- 
tries, Turkey pledges to realize without delay the reforms and ameliorations 
necessitated by^ the local needs in the provinces inhabited by the Armenians 
and to guarantee their security against the Kurds and the Circassians. 

Great Britain, however, had won a great diplomatic victory shortly before 
the Treaty of San Stefano had been concluded. Through the Cyprus Conven- 
tion (June 4, 1878), concluded with the Government of the Sultan, the Island 
of Cyprus had been placed at her disposal, ostensibly to enable her to watch 
the execution of the Reforms, but in reality to guarantee the integrity of the 
Ottoman empire. The Convention stipulated : 

In case Batum, Ardahan and Kars or any of these places would be 
retained by Russia and, if, at any time Russia did try to appropriate any 
portion of His Imperial Majesty the Sultan's territories in Asia defined by the 
final peace treaty, England pledges to unite with His Imperial Majesty for the 
defense of the said territories by force of arms. 

His Imperial Majesty the Sultan promises England to introduce the neces- 
sary reforms (to be later decided by the two countries)^ concerning the satis- 
factory administration and protection of the Christian subjects and others of 
the Ottoman empire, who live in the said territories; in order to enable Britain 
to insure the necessary means for the execution of her commitments. His 
Imperial Majesty the Sultan agrees to assign the Island of Cyprus to be occu- 
pied and administered by England. 

This Convention was signed secretly, without Russia's knowledge. On 
May 18-30, 1878, almost at the same time, another secret accord was concluded 
in London between Chouvaloff and Salisbury, acting respectively for Russia 

^The Russian Plenipotentiaries had proposed : "the Administrative autonomy demanded by . . ." 
Italics ours. 

^This provides the key to the Armenian problem. It underlines the reciprocal distrust which 
Russia and England kept alive. Article VII of the ChouvalofF-Salisbury agreement betrays 
the intentions of each of the two rivals to take, along with the Porte, the initiative of the 
Reforms and to eliminate the third power. 



and Great Britain. Article VII of this agreement stipulated that the promises 
made to Armenia by the preliminary treaty of San Stefano must not concern 
Russia exclusively, but also England; while under Article X Russia agreed to 
evacuate and return to the Turks Alachguerd and Bayazid. Finally under 
Article XI England took note of Russia's pledge not to extend her frontiers in the 
future in the direction of Turkey in Asia. 

The Armenian question w^as thus beginning to assume international dimen- 
sions. It was no longer a question of internal reforms, as Russia desired it, nor a 
bilateral accord as planned by England, 

Not long after, Armenians learned that the Treaty of San Stefano would 
be revised in Berlin (July 1-13, 1878) by the great powers, A deputation made 
up of Khrimian Hairik, Monsignor Khoren Nar-Bey, and Stepan Papazian, 
assisted by Minas Tcheraz, the latter as an interpreter-secretary, went to Berlin 
and pleaded for an administrative autonomy for Armenia, hke the one granted 
Mount Lebanon. Unfortunately, their mission did not succeed. Lord Salisbury 
resented the first part of the San Stefano clause (Article XVI). He insisted on 
the absolute necessity of Russian troops withdrawing even before the execution 
of the reforms. Article XVI of the Treaty of San Stefano was therefore "re- 
touched" by the master stylists of diplomacy at Berlin and became, by inversion. 
Article LXI of the Treaty of Berlin. But it was distorted to such an extent that 
it was no longer recognizable. It read : 

Turkey pledges to fulfill, without further delay, the ameliorations and 
reforms necessitated by local needs, in the provinces inhabited by Armenians, 
to guarantee their security against the Circassians and Kurds. From time to 
time she will inform the powers of the measures taken to this effect. The 
powers will supervise the application of these reforms. 

This was the end of the dream for autonomy. The Armenian delegation, 
disquieted by this inversion of justice, submitted (July 13, 1878) the following 
note of protest to all the plenipotentiaries, excepting the Turkish delegates : 

The Armenian deputation expresses its regrets that its legitimate and moderate 
demands have not been accepted by the Congress. 

We believed that a nation of a few millions like ours — which has not been up 
to the present the instrument of any foreign policy, which, though more oppressed 
than the other Christian populations of Turkey, has caused no trouble to the Turk- 
ish government, and which, although without ties of religion or origin with one or 
another of the great powers, is Christian like all the other Christian races of Turkey 
— could hope to find in our century the same protection granted to others. 

We believed that such a nation, free of all political ambitions, should have 
acquired the right to live its own life and be governed on its own ancestral land by 
Armenian functionaries. 

The Armenians now realize that they have been mistaken, that their rights 
have not been recognized, because they have been peaceful, and that the mainten- 



ance of the independence of their ancient Church and nationality has not helped 
them in any way. 

The Armenian deputation will return home with this lesson in mind. It declares, 
however, that the Armenian people will not remain silent until Europe gives satis- 
faction to their just demands.''' 

In the dark days of disappointment and disillusion which followed Mon- 
signor Khrimian said : "You can't eat harissa with a paper spoon ;"* by which 
he meant, appeals and memorandums do not suffice in this kind of world ; one 
must resort to force to end social wrong and achieve political ends. 

The Turks were determined to make no concession, however small, except 
on paper. The Armenians were uncompromising in their demand for the 
application of the treaties; while Bekir Sami Pasha recruited the Hamidie 
troops, which later became notorious for their cruelty. 

Finally the Ambassadors of the six great powers, tired of waiting for the 
fulfillment of the Sultan's pledge, presented a note to His Majesty (June 11, 
1880) demanding the execution of the reforms. 

As the answer of the Ottoman government did not give satisfaction, they 
repeated their demand on September 7 of the same year. The Sultan, well 
informed about the dissensions among European powers, and an expert by this 
time at beating them to their game, continued to disregard their orders and pleas. 

In the meantime the situation of the Armenians worsened. Political cen- 
sorship silenced the press. It was reported that many cases of books on chemistry 
were burnt in the custom house of Constantinople by officials who, because of 
excessive zeal or sheer stupidity suspected in the formula H^O an attack on the 
sacred person of the Sultan : H^ being interpreted as Hamid II, and O as zero ; 
in the minds of these "clever" officials the formula had meant : Hamid II equals 
zero. The poor Sultan ! 

Against the mounting repressive measures of the Sultan at home, a revolu- 
tionary press arose abroad. Megrditch Portoukalian, a political refugee, estab- 
lished a printing press in Marseilles and published the newspaper Armenia. 
Other revolutionary publications abroad, such as Hunchak and Dashnag, organs 
of the political parties of the same name, re-aroused the people at home to shake 
ofT the yoke of the Tyrant. The Hunchakian party was founded in 1887 and 
the Dashnag party in 1890. Both were given to the creation of an autonomous 
Armenia governed along social democratic lines. 

The British consul at Erzeroum, Colonel Chermside, cabled in 1 890 : "The 
secret groups organized lately at Erzeroum and in the prinvinces, the attempts 
to secure arms, and finally the recent events at Van and the surrounding region, 

'From the French translation of Fr. Macler from the Armenian text of Mr. Saroukhan, in 
the newspaper Asiatique, XI th series, Vol. V, No. 1, 1915, pp. 167-8. 

^Harissa is an Armenian dish, a thick soup made of wheat or barley and small pieces of meat, 
prepared during festive occasions. — Ed. 



all are indicative of a serous discontent. It would indeed be strange to expect 
anything but discontent."^ 

In 1894, a fight occasioned by the incursion of a band of Kurdish thieves, 
who had come to Sassoun to steal cattle from the Armenian peasants, turned into 
a massacre. The troops sent to reestablish order completed the work of pillage 
and destruction begun by the brigands. In 1895, the same thing occurred in 
Zeitoun. Blood flowed freely all over Armenia. By the end of 1896 300,000 
Armenians had been massacred in cold blood. Europe was touched. Gladstone 
publicly castigated the "Infamous Assassin." Germany and Austria kept a 
criminal silence. England, France and Russia had elaborated (May 16, 1895) 
a new project of reforms. But Russia backed out. Prince Lobanov-Rostovski, 
then foreign minister of Russia, who had served as Russian Ambassador at Con- 
stantinople in 1878-1879, was for an Armenia without Armenians. France 
retained a passive attitude. The Sultan was pleased and quietly continued his 
work of destruction. Freedom of action in this respect within his domain this 
time was purchased with sympathy for Germany which dreamt of a Berlin-to- 
Baghdad railroad. 

The Armenians, however, were not the only ones who suffered under the 
bloody despot. Other minorities, and even Turks were being ground under by 
the unspeakeable tyranny. It was thus that in 1907 (December 27-29), a Con- 
gress of revolutionary parties in the Ottoman empire met in Paris. A resolution, 
passed unanimously, demanded the deposition of the Red Sultan, Abdul Hamid, 
and the proclamation of a constitutional regime. 

This was the beginning of the "Young Turk" revolution which flared in 
1908. So far as the Armenians were concerned, however, the revolution ended 
in a sham. In April 1909, a counter-revolution fomented by the same Young 
Turks, who designated themselves with the attractive title of Committee of 
Union and Progress, and paraded themselves as liberals, slaughtered another 
30,000 Armenians in Adana. 

During the Balkan wars, 1912-1913, when Turkey lost her European cities, 
Russia again took the initiative for reforms in Armenia. A new delegation 
was appointed by CathoHcos Georg V of Echmiadzin, of which Boghos Nubar 
Pasha became chairman, with temporary headquarters in Paris. Sympathetic 
Frenchmen joined in the struggle by carrying on an intensive campaign on 
behalf of the Armenian cause. The periodical Pro-Armenia was revived under 
the leadership of Francis Dehaut de Pressense, a prominent figure in French 
politics, and Victor Berard, the French scholar and publicist. 

The six big powers resumed their consultations. Andrei Mandelstamm intro- 
duced a new project of reforms, to which the Ambassadors representing the 
interested powers devoted seven meetings (July 3-23, 1913) . 

^Mik. Varandian, L'Armenie et la Question Armenienne, p. 58. 



But Russia, embittered by German reservations, decided to start private 
negotiations with Turkey, Besides, in a note dated June 25, 1913, Russia had 
declared herself against the partition of the Ottoman empire. What imperiaHst 
Russia wanted was to reserve for herself the privilege to institute the reforms at 
her own discretion, and was opposed to the interference of foreign powers in a 
dispute between neighbors. 

Germany, of course, would not agree to this. "German interests require the 
protection of the provinces of Asia Minor and if Russia occupied them, Germany 
would find herself confronted with an economic crisis," wrote a German news- 
paper.^*^ "Our diplomacy must be on its guard against Russian threats to 

This required Russia to come to an understanding with Germany. Sazonov 
the Russian foreign minister, convinced his German colleague Von Jagow that 
the Russian government had no territorial designs in Turkish Armenia and that 
its goal was limited to the introduction of reforms in the interest of Turkey and 
her Armenian subjects. Following these assurances, and on instructions received 
from his minister, the German ambassador at Constantinople asked Premier Said 
Halim Pasha to comply with the Russian demands, "reduced to a minimum 
thanks to German intervention." 

A Russo-Turkish agreement was signed in Constantinople on January 26, 
1914. According to this document eastern Anatolia was divided into two zones. 
The western zone was composed of the vilayets of Erzeroum, Trebizond, and 
Sivas; while the eastern part included those of Van, Bitlis, Kharput and Diar- 
bekir. Each region was to be administered by a foreign inspector-general. 

Hardly had the two inspectors-general, Hoff (Norway) and Westenenk 
(Dutch), set foot in Turkey, preparing to assume their functions, when the 
European War started. On August 6, 1914 a German-Turkish alliance was al- 
ready concluded. In the first article of this pact Germany promised to Turkey the 
abolition of the capitulations; by article five it was provided "to rectify the 
eastern frontiers of the empire in such a manner that immediate contact be- 
tween Turkey and the Moslem populations of Russia would be insured," The 
pan-Germanists and pan-Turanists were to walk hand in hand ! 

By virtue of the same pact, Turkey entrusted to Germany the reorganiza- 
tion of her armies. The Liman Von Sanders military mission was established in 
Constantinople, Hoff and Westenenk were sent back home. Instead of reforms, 
Turkey was to organize the inhuman deportations and massacres of 1915. 

^^Magdeburische Z^itung, July 1, 1913 


Briefs ... 

Uncle Geer 

By G. Eksoozian 

Editorial Note 

This character sketch is taken from a volume in Armenian, by Mr. Eksoozian, 
given to short stores of first generation Americans of Armenian background. The 
period covered is the last decade of the nineteenth and the first few decades of the 
twentieth century. "Uncle Geer" and the other characters portrayed in the volume, 
Kyanki ^civeshte (The Comedy of Life), are real people whom the author came to 
know personally, as lawyer, compatriot, or friend. 

Much of the credit of Kyanki ^aveshte as a contribution to American national- 
ities history and literature goes to Mr. Garabed Aramian of Yeprad Press, who has 
pioneered, at great effort and cost, in this type of publication. Such literature, he 
believes, will constitute an important source for the social history of American 
nationalities groups. The translator has succeeded in preserving the elegant sim- 
plicity of the original and in eliciting the same sense of appreciation that one gets 
from reading the Armenian text. 

Jtl E was born in a little village in the province of Harput, Asia Minor, the 
son of a farmer. During infancy, he lived in an atmosphere of love and devotion 
in the quiet of their little home. His childhood was spent mostly in the fields and 
vineyards. But when he reached young manhood, full of the vigor of life, for 
some unknown reason, he left all behind, his home, family and farm, and went 
on to foreign lands, Roumania, the Caucasus, Egypt, and finally came to America, 
settling permanently in a far-off corner of a small Massachusetts town. Here he 
has lived with his wife for the past forty years. They have toiled and sweated and 
even now, after all those years, they are isolated, there being no public conveyance 
coming near their farm, only a narrow path. 

He is now nearly eighty and his back is bent like a bow, but it is easy to 
see that he had been, in his younger days, tall of stature and broad of shoulders. 
His white hair, deep voice, fine face is a picture of virile beauty that even the 
ravishes of age could not completely obliterate. 

It was a summer day, I went to see him on a special matter. At the entrance 
to the farm I met Mrs. Loosig wearing an embroidered apron and busy feeding 
the chickens. 

"Good morning, Mrs. Loosig, how are you? How is Uncle Geer, how is 
he feeling now?" 

"Good morning. He is well, I am the sick one, but all who come inquire 



about him." After this remark, Mrs. Loosig called to her husband with her 
resonant voice. 


There was no answer. 

"Giragos, where are you?" 

Again no answer. 

Mrs. Loosig then turned to me and continued, "That man has gone off 
somewhere again. The other day, I pulled him out of the ditch and if I had 
gotten there a little later, he would have been dead. I told him this morning to 
take it easy, but he claims he can't. He asked ?ne to hitdh the horse to the 
wagon so he could take a few bushels of vegetables to the market, sell them and 
with that money buy some meat, butter, salt. You know he can't even get on 
or off the wagon alone. He takes the stuff to sell but brings back only half the 
money he should. They all cheat him, right and left. I could do better myself. 
Ah yes, as I said, he is becoming helpless." 

"Giragos, where, where are you, the lawyer is here." 

Then suddenly I spied Uncle Geer coming out from the com field, walking 
slowly and bending low over a stick he held in his hand. He looked very much 
Uke a large turtle. 

"This is our lot," spoke Uncle Geer as he came closer. "I just returned 
from the market, I'm all tired out, but what can I do, there's work on a farm 
and it must be done.. Those rowdies in the market-place, I have my hands full 
with them. They know I am no longer young and take advantage of me. They 
climb into my wagon pull out the vegetables, sell them and bring me only half 
the money they should. When I speak up, they promise to pay me the balance 
the next day. When the next day comes, I either forget or they completely deny 
owing me the money. Angrily I come home and here again I have no peace 
with this wife of mine." 

"Uncle Geer, let us sit under this apple tree, I have found a cure for all 
your troubles, it is here in my portfolio. That is why I have come to see you, I 
wish to have a talk with you." 

Uncle Geer's tortured face now took on a look of surprise. He seemed 
to sense a hidden danger and with obvious uneasiness shifted his body from one 
foot to another and finally came and sat on the grass near me. 

"Listen to me carefully. Uncle Geer," I said. "For forty years you have 
toiled and sweated on this small strip of land you call your farm. But your luck 
is against you, even people and nature itsdf are working against you. You have 
done your share and now you are in need of rest. The hardships you undergo at 
your age for a mere existence is simply against all human understanding, believe 
me. So I have come to tell your wife and yourself how you can live comfortably 



for the rest of your lives. I am referring to the buildings on the main highway 
going into town, not far from the river, on the slope of the hiU — the State Home 
for the Aged." 

"State Home for the Aged? Are you crazy, man? Woe be to your Home !" 
burst out Uncle Geer and made an effort at rising and running away from the 
distasteful suggestion, but his knees gave way under him and he tell sideways on 
the green lawn. With some difficulty I sat him up again near me. 

"Uncle Geer, there is no reason for resentment or anger," I said. "You 
know that in this country even old and unprotected horses are taken care of. 
That Home for the Aged is for those who have worked faithfully through the 
years and are in need of rest and solace, especially when they have no one to 
take care of them. If we can get a tenant for this place of stone and dirt, all 
the better." 

Suddenly, like one making a last effort to save his life, Uncle Geer by a 
miracle stood upon his feet. Trembling and pointing his stick to the far corners 
of his farm, he spoke with a husky choking voice. 

"Listen, you, I don't want any part of your so-called justice, you pagans. 
If all this is just stone and dirt for you, it isn't for me. For me they have a soul, 
they are paradise. Forty years ago this land was as fiat as a handkerchief. With 
my bare hands I have cleared and tilled the soil, planted every growing thing, 
carried upon my shoulders each and every stone to build this house, I dug the 
ditch — my very youth has gone into the core of this land. That is why this 
farm is part of me, me — Giragos, and here it is, upon this land that I will die, 
do you understand? Go tell your leaders that Giragos is an Armenian, an old- 
type of Armenian who does not live on charity. I want no part of their Home 
nor their cemetaries." 

All this he said, then doubling over on his stick again walked towards the 
cornfields from whence he had come. 

Mrs. Loosig who thus far had been listening quietly to our conversation, 
came closer to me as she wiped a tear with the end of her embroidered apron 
and said, "Mr. Lawyer, please do not get angry at what Giragos just said. He 
is the son of a well-known and well-to-do family. Do not blame him, we are 
used to this." 

Once again she raised her apron to her eyes, wiped a tear and followed 
her husband. I was then convinced that neither the turtle could leave its shell 
nor Giragos his home. 

I walked away from that farm with a feeling of indescribable pride. I was 
like an Armenian peasant who for the first time comes face to face with Mt. 


Tribute to Armenians During 
World War 11' 

By Thomas A, Sparks, S.T.D. 

Mr. Chairman, Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen : 

It gives me great pleasure to be able to speak to you at this time. First, 
I bring you greetings and best wishes from the Right Rev. William T. Manning, 
Bishop of New York, and from the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, which many 
of you have visited, and I trust will continue to visit, there to find quiet, and 
confidence, and strength in this time of world-wide-war and tumult. 

For we shall need confidence, need it supremely, if the forces of right are to 
triumph over the forces of wrong. 

I am happy to speak to the members of the Armenian community here in 
New York, not only because of the occasion of this meeting, which is assembled 
here to express your patriotic feelings and your loyalty to the United States gov- 
ernment and people, but because of what you yourselves represent so eloquently 
in your long historic tradition stretching back to the most remote antiquity. No 
nation, no race, no people, could have sustained for so long a period of time, so 
continuous, and so noble a tradition unless its spiritual forces were deeply rooted 
and tenaciously maintained under all conditions. 

And it is the spiritual forces of all mankind that are now threatened. All 
the higher powers of our human nature, and our best and noblest instincts, our 
finest traditions, our most valued achievements, which are the flowers of long 
centuries of man's upward struggle toward the stars, are now challenged by 
brute forces in the name of what these ignoble forces term the "New Order." It 
is no new order in any sense ! 

It is an old, old order that forward-looking men had come to think had been 
left far behind in the course of human progress. 

The so-called "New Order" aims at the reduction of the majority of man- 
kind to the condition of slaves, who are destined to work and produce goods for 
their masters, the self-proclaimed "Master Races." 

No people, no nation, no group, which has any sense of freedom will tamely 
submit to any such program of degradation. 

And certainly not the many nations and peoples, great or small, who have 
banded together in organized resistance against the common enemy. 

It is a proud thing for any man to stand here and speak to you ! Among 
the very earliest records of mankind are found the traditions of Armenia and 
Armenians. Babylonia, Persia, Egypt, are venerable names in the treasure house 

^Speech of the Rev. Thomas A. Sparks, S.T.D., before the Armenian Progressive League of 
America on March 1, 1942, in New York City. 



of history, but before them there was an Armenia, an Armenia which held its 
place proudly among those ancient cultures. 

When Alexander the Great conquered all the known world, and sighed for 
more conquests, he had to reckon with Armenia. 

Armenia throughout the first four centuries of the Roman empire, while 
brought into vassalage, was never thoroughly Romanized, for it maintained its 
own language and customs under its own sovereigns. We do not know exactly 
when Christianity began first to penetrate into Armenia, just as we do not know 
this about a great many other places, but in the third century St. Gregory, styled 
the Illuminator, did his great work of teaching and conversion. By him King 
Tiridates (238-314) was baptized. Armenia thus was the first country to have a 
Christian ruler. This antedates the Christian profession of the Emperor Con- 
stantine the Great, who is often mistakenly set forth as the first Christian ruler. 
The honor belongs to Armenia, which became the first Christian nation of the 
world, and so the oldest in our great tradition of the most advanced civilization 
of mankind. Illumination was sought for, illumination was found, and illumina- 
tion prevailed. 

And it has continued so. True it is that your nation has had great sorrows 
and tribulations. Warred upon, evil-treated, decimated, yet never destroyed, the 
Armenian people have always reformed their lives and have gone on with indom- 
itable courage, as they do today. 

Hence your great contribution to every nation that seeks the right. No 
nation, large or small, poor or rich, when unjustly attacked by predatory gangster 
nations, as they are now being attacked today, but can take to itself fresh inspira- 
tion and new courage from the glowing example of Armenia. 

And so it is the most natural thing in the world for you Armenians here in 
America to proclaim your loyal helpfulness to America when she is under attack. 
Loyalty and courage are your heritage and in your blood, and you would be 
untrue to your own selves were you to do otherwise. I am sure you, seeing the 
right, cannot do differently ! A tree is known by its fruit. You are doing the 
natural and rightful thing. 

Here in America we have upheld the great freedoms dear to free men 
everywhere, and we are arming ourselves at an enormous and ever increasing 
rate to maintain those precious rights. Men of many racial origins, be they 
citizens, or guests among us, have rallied to the common cause for which we 
fight. It is the common concern of all. 

Speed is essential to our great war effort. We need to produce arms and 
munitions with lightning rapidity. Nothing must stand in the way of this. 
Better it is to forego some of our accustomed liberties and much of our ac- 
customed luxuries, than it would be to lose the war. The only danger is that 
people will underestimate the gravity of the situation for us, and want to take 
things at their usual leisured pace, whereas we must rapidly achieve such a pre- 



ponderance of weapons of all kinds that we can speedily wage aggressive "war 
to the utmost ! Only that can achieve victory for us and our associates. 

The criminal nations must be taught a lesson that will last a very long time, 
and that lesson is that we count nothing dear when our liberty is threatened. 

When that lesson is fully learned by Germany, Italy, Japan, and their 
friends, then maybe they too will come to value the kind of freedom and right for 
which we are willing to pay so great a price. 

The United Nations, that great company of freedom loving peoples, firmly 
united in a just war, will not sheath the sword until victory comes with the 
defeat of those who have set themselves against civilization, against righteous- 
ness, against the best that man has achieved. 

Armenians, I salute you as brethren in a common sacred cause! 

And may Almighty God bless our efforts for righteousness and justice for 
the sake of all mankind. 

Theodore Roosevelt and Armenia 

From the March 1919 issue of The New Armenia 
By Arshag Mahdesian^ 

X HE death of Colonel Theodore Roosevelt has deprived the Armenian nation 
of one of its most illustrious and sincere friends. As his book, The Strenuous 
Life, proves, Colonel Roosevelt long ago had interested himself in the Armenians. 
On September 28, 1904, he received most cordially, at the White House, an 
Armenian delegation, which, representing the Armenian Catholicos, had come 
to this country to enlist the sympathy and assistance of the United States in re- 
lieving the Armenians from Turkish persecution. During this reception, Mr. 
James Bronson Reynolds, in his introductory speech for the Armenian delega- 
tion, said: "Since 1895 more men, women and children have been massacred 
in Armenia by the Turkish soldiers and their auxiliaries than were killed on both 
sides in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870." 

Then, President Roosevelt, amiably interrupting him, rejoined : "You are 
quoting from my own book. The Strenuous Life. It was I who first made that 

In his message to Congress in 1904, President Roosevelt declared that it 
was inevitable that the United States "should desire eagerly to give expression 
to its horror on an occasion like that of the massacre of the Jews in Kishinef, or 
when it witnesses such systematic and long extended cruelty and oppression as 
the cruelty and oppression of which the Armenians have been victims, and which 
has won for them the indignant pity of the civilized world." 

On another occasion he declared : "Over and above all considerations of 
trade and politics we will continue to urge the cjaims of outraged humanity in 
the stricken land of Armenia." 

IFor a biographical sketch of Mr. Mahdesian see pages 201-203. 



In 1905, President Roosevelt received from His Holiness Mekrtich I. 
Klirimian, the late Catholicos of All the Armenians, a letter of congratulation 
upon his election. The communication, written in the ceremonial form used 
by Armenian rulers of the fifth century, read : 

Mekrtich, Servant of Jesus Christ, and, by the inscrutable will of God, Chief 
Bishop and Catholicos of All the Armenians, Supreme Patriarch of the Mother See 
of the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church of Armenia, to His Excellency, Theodore 
Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, greeting and patriarchal 

Your Excellency: God, Who in His providence, bestows grace and all good 
gifts abundantly upon the worthy, has verily given Your Excellency a large measure 
of His blessing, and has raised you to the high office for which you have proved 
yourself so worthy in the past. 

I consider it a great privilege and pleasure to extend to Your Excellency the 
most sincere congratulations of myself and of the Church and the people I represent, 
on the happy occasion of your receiving, as the most worthy person to be their Chief 
Magistrate, the absolute confidence and approval of your great and enlightened 

It is a source of great satisfaction to me when I consider the comparatively 
happy lot of those of my people who, having escaped the unbearable yoke of Turkish 
tyranny and oppression, have taken refuge in your glorious country ,where while 
earning an honest livelihood, they are being, at the same time, elevated mentally and 
morally, sharing with all other citizens the full benefits of the freedom and civiliza- 
tion of the United States. Would to God that the remnant of my people could 
enjoy in their own country the same peace and quiet and the benefits of righteous 
laws, with due protection of life, honor and property. 

I pray Your Excellency to accept my profound respects and heartfelt thanks 
for the very kind reception accorded to my delegates, the two Archbishops, who were 
commissioned to plead the cause of the suffering Armenian people in Turkey. I 
cherish the hope that the powerful voice of Your Excellency's Government will 
eventually aid in bringing peace and justice to the people of unfortunate Armenia. . . . 

Because of the strong sense of justice and righteousness President Roose- 
velt was known to possess, many appeals were made to him in behalf of Ar- 
menia. On January 18, 1906, Mr. James Bronson Reynolds presented to him 
a f>etition in which prominent European statesmen, educators, publicists and 
citizens, as Bjornstjerne Bjomson and Fridtjof Nansen, of Norway ; General 
Booth, of the Salvation Army; Professor Wiindt, of Leipzig; M, Berthelot, 
Professor Ernest Lavisse, Jules Claretie, Leon Bourgeois, Ludovic Halevy, Ana- 
tole Leroy-Beaulieu, and Louis Blanc, of France ; and thirty-one senators and 
twenty-five deputies of France, two senators and eleven deputies of Italy, two 
senators and forty-seven deputies of Belgium, one deputy of Sweden, and eight 
deputies of Denmark, fourteen English bishops, fifty-one professors of the uni- 
versities of Great Britain and the Continent, besides many eminent citizens of 
Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Germany, Austria, Italy, Scotland, and 
Ireland, had joined to save from total annihilation "the Armenian people whose 
origin is the same as ours, and who have played an important part in the de- 
velopment of civilization since ancient times." 

At the same time, through the joint efforts of Armenia and The Friends 



of Armenia, many distinguished clergymen, educators, philanthropists, governors 
and mayors in all parts of the United States, adopted or endorsed resolutions 
supporting the cause of Armenia. In response to all these appeals, the Honor- 
able Elihu Root, then Secretary of State, wrote : 

The sympathy of the American people with the oppressed of every country has 
been repeatedly expressed by various branches of this Government, and in the case of 
the unfortunate Armenians, has been eloquently voiced by the American nation itself. 
There is no room for doubt in any quarter as to the desire of the President that these 
Armenians should possess the security of life and property which it has been the 
concerted aim of the European powers to assure to them. The sufferings of the 
Armenian subjects of Turkey cry aloud for remedy and redress. They shock the 
humanitarian sense of all mankind. . . . No right-minded man can witness §uch 
occurrences without craving the power to prevent them. I most sincerely wish that 
the United States had the power. 

The ?ion possumus attitude of the Roosevelt administration toward Armenia 
was diplomatically justified as the United States was not one of the signatory 
Powers which had guaranteed, in Article LXI of the Treaty of Berlin, "ameliora- 
tion and reforms" for the Armenian provinces then under the yoke of Turkey. 
Colonel Roosevelt was perhaps explaining his former official position as well as 
that of the United States when he said, in a letter dated July 10, 1918 : 

We had neither the power nor the right ourselves to begin a world war by our 
going to war with Turkey in the past, but now the world war has come, and we 
are in it, now we can fight effectively beside our Allies. We have the only chance 
that has ever been offered to us to interfere by force of arms in entirely disinterested 
fashion for the oppressed nationalities that are ground under the Turkish rule. It 
is a dreadful thing that we should fail to take advantage of this opportunity, and 
it will be a lasting disgrace to our nation if we persist in the failure. 

Owing to innumerable stories of the Armenian persecutions. Colonel Roose- 
velt was led to fear that the new generation of the Armenians had lost its martial 
prowess. During an interview granted by him to Armenian students in 1912, 
he said : "I want Armenians to be able to bear arms just as they did in the days 
of King Tigranes, so that in the next generation no one can say that the Christian 
population of Turkey cannot fight." 

The devotion, gallantry and valor displayed by the Armenians during 
the war, their heroic sacrifices for the triumph of the Allies, were a cause of 
great satisfaction to Colonel Roosevelt ; and, whenever an opportunity pre- 
sented itself, he did not fail to plead for the independence of Armenia. 

"I am doing everything I can, and shall continue to do everything I can 
for the Armenians," he wrote to a correspondent a few days before his lamented 
death ; and it is reported that one of his last acts was the signing of the petition 
which was circulated by The New Armenia to urge prompt action on Senator 
Lodge's Resolution in favor of a United and Independent Armenia. 

When the grateful citizens of the new Armenian republic come to honor 
the memory of their great friends, Theodore Roosevelt will be remembered 
among the first of those who nobly and effectively championed Armenia in 
her heroic struggle for national independence ! 



The Internationalization of Jerusalem 
And the Armenian Patriarchate 

Editorial Note 

The two papers presented here relate to the stand taken by the Armenian Patriarch- 
ate of Jerusalem before the UN Trusteeship Council on the question of the inter- 
nationalization of the Holy City. One is a report on the mission of Bishop Tiran to 
Geneva and Jerusalem as the official representative of the Jerusalem Armenian Patri- 
archate. The other is the original, undeleted text of Bishop Tiraii's letter on the subject 
of the internationalization of the City, which appeared in the New York Herald-Tribune 
of June 4, 1950. 

The Roman Catholic press responded favorably to Bishop Tiran's letter, the second 
of the two documents presented below. The Catholic News of New York, June 17, carried 
this headline to an extended report on it: "Armenian Bishop Denounces Latest Holy 
Places Plan. It Reveals 'Ignorance of Religious Conditions in Holy City,' Prelate Says." 
In the body of the report the article spoke of Bishop Tiran as having sharply criticized 
. . . and attacked the proposal of the 285 leaders. A similar report appeared in the 
New World of Chicago, 111., June 16, 1950. 

It has been suggested by one of the members of the editorial advisory board, who 
has found these documents of particular interest, that an attempt be made to present 
In the pages of this journal other viewpoints and give readers "a full picture of this 
highly controversial issue." While public interest in it is alive, letters or articles on the 
subject will be given serious consideration for publication. 

The Mission of Bishop Tiran to Geneva and Jerusalem 

His Grace Bishop Tiran, Primate of the Armenian Church in North America, 
gave to the Diocesan Central Committee a report covering his activities during the 
three months' trip he undertook as the representative of the Armenian Patriarchate 
of Jerusalem. A summaiy of this report is given below: 

In December 1947 the United Nations General Assembly resolved that in the 
event the British Government withdrew from Palestine, the latter be partitioned 
between Arabs and Jews, and Jerusalem be placed under the international authority 
of the United Nations. Accordingly the General Assembly instructed the Trusteeship 
Council to draft a Statute for the future international administration of Jerusalem 
and to implement it by assuming sovereignty over the city. 

Pursuant to these instructions the Trusteeship Council drafted a Statute and 
voted on it in April 1948. However, on May 14, 1948 the British Government with- 
drew its mandate from Palestine and the Trusteeship Council was unable to imple- 
ment the Statute it had prepared. Meanwhile a war broke out between the Jews 
and the Arabs, and the two opposing forces met in Jerusalem. The Arab forces 
occupied the eastern sector of the city, and the Jewish forces occupied its western 



sector. Finally, after a month, with the signing of a truce between the governments 
of Jordan and Israel, a static situation was created which still continues. 

However, in its session of December 9, 1949 the UN General Assembly by a 
vote of two-thirds majority renewed its decision to internationalize the city, and 
again instructed the Trusteeship Council to amend its earlier Statute in harmony 
with the exigencies of the new situation and to implement the said Statute by estab- 
lishing United Nations sovereignty over it. At the same time the General Assembly 
invited the governments of Israel and Jordan to facilitate the implementation of this 
resolution by their good-will and cooperation. The United States, Great Britain, 
and certain other countries considered this resolution impracticable and voted 
against it, declaring, however, that they would not oppose the resolution adopted 
by the required majority. On the other hand, the governments of Israel and Jordan 
were opposed to internationalization. 

Nevertheless, conforming to the General Assembly resolution, the Trusteeship 
Council began the task of executing its function and convened in Geneva on Janu- 
ary 19, 1950 to deal, among other issues, with the question of internationalization, 
and placed first on its agenda the question of amending the Statute drafted for the 
Holy City. 

The Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem, which is one of the important re- 
ligious establishments in the Holy City, having been apprised of this course of events, 
appointed Bishop Tiran as its representative so that he might appear before the 
Trusteeship Council and present the views of the Armenian Patriarchate relative to 
the Statute to be formulated for the international administration of Jerusalem. 

Upon receiving this authority, His Grace presented a memorandum to the 
UN Trusteeship Council wherein he set forth the position and rights of the 
Armenians in Jerusalem, indicated the favorable attitude of the Armenian Patriarch- 
ate towards its internationalization, requested that the status quo be preserved, and 
recalled that together with other religious insitutions the Armenian Patriarchate 
should have a voice and its rightful place in the future administration of Jerusalem. 

Meanwhile, before the Jerusalem issue reached the above- described stage, the 
Very Rev. Yeghishe Vardapet, Locum Tenens of the Armenian Patriarchate, sug- 
gested — in a personal letter to Bishop Tiran — that His Grace pay a visit to Jerusalem 
during Easter to confer with him and with the members of the St. James Brother- 
hood on various matters pertaining to the Holy See, 

Accordingly, Bishop Tiran, with the counsel of the Diocesan Central Committee 
left New York on January 23, arriving in Geneva the following day. In the interim 
Bishop Tiran cabled to the Locum Tenens requesting that the Very Rev. Serovpe 
Manoukian, who was preparing to come to the United States to raise funds for the 
stricken Monastery and people of Jerusalem, make his journey by way of Geneva, 
and there inform him of conditions In the Holy City and in the Armenian 

Upon arrival in Geneva Serovpe Vardapet conveyed to Bishop Tiran a detailed 
report concerning the situation, policy, and viewpoints of the Patriarchate. On Feb- 
ruary 16 Father Serovpe left Geneva for Paris and New York. 

The Trusteeship Council took up the Jerusalem issue on January 30 and 
continued to deal with it until the early part of April. The main task of the 
Council was the amendment of the Statute. But as the Council was about to take 



up this matter, M. Roger Garreau, the Council President, offered a new proposal 
whereby the international sector of Jerusalem was to be merely a narrow strip of 
the city extending from north to south and embracing the international shrines. 
The city's western sector was to be left to the Jews and the eastern sector to the 
Arabs. Fortunately this proposal received no support from the Council members 
and it was set aside; whereupon the Council started the hearings of the representa- 
tives of the various organizations intimately concerned with the fate of Jerusalem. 
Only representatives of the twelve Council nations had the right to speak, make 
official proposals, and vote. Others could present their views by permission of the 
meeting or its President. 

Opinions and suggestions on the Jerusalem issue were presented in person by 
the two representatives of the Greek and Armenian Patriarchates of Jerusalem, by 
the representative of the World Council of Churches, and by the Secretary of the 
American Christian Palestine Committee. In addition, Roman Catholic, Jewish, 
and Arab organizations conveyed their views by wire and letter to the Council 

The views of the Greek and Armenian Patriarchates were at all times presented 
in comraon accord. Archbishop Germanos Thyateira, representing the Greek 
Patriarchate, was heard three times on the stand of his Patriarchate. Bishop Tiran, 
representing the Armenian Patriarchate, was heard on various occasions — eight 
times in all. His first two extensive statements, after describing the position of the 
Armenian Patriarchate, related to the articles of the Statute which contained pro- 
visions constituting the Legislative Council for Jerusalem and the manner in which 
its members were to be elected; the program, policy, and economic status of public 
and communal schools in Jerusalem; the protection of the Holy Places; the status 
of religious communities, and their mutual relations; and the preservation of the 
status quo. Moreover, after the two initial reports he made six other statements, 
at different times, three of which were given at the direct instance of the Trusteeship 
Council and related to one or the other of the above-mentioned questions, amplifying 
and elucidating them further. 

The suggestions which Bishop Tiran offered to the Trusteeship Council for 
amendment of the April 1948 Statute, were as follows: 

That the Legislative Council for Jerusalem include an equal number of Christians, 
Moslems and Jews, elected by popular suffrage; 

That delegates, equal in number to half of the elected legislators, be appointed by 
the officially recognized religious establishments, likewise in equal proportion; 

That the city's schools be based on the communal principle, and each community 
large enough to have a school of its own have the right to maintain such a school under 
Its own direction and in accordance with its own language and traditions, but to enjoy 
equal status with the public schools and be entitled to government subsidy: 

That in the event of dissatisfaction with regard to any ruling by the Governor, 
appeal be permitted to be made to the City's Supreme Court in disputes relating to the 
Holy Places; 

That the Statute contain clear and well-defined provisions for the preservation of 
the status quo, that the state have no jurisdiction to intervene in the internal matters 
concerning religious conununities; 

That aside from the accepted laws of the municipal bodies, the Governor shall not 
interfere in the construction, maintenance, and demolition of religious buildings, which 
are not international shrines. 



Bishop Tiran made a point to have interviews with the Council members on 
the above and related subjects dealing with the future status and administration of 
Jerusalem. The important views expressed were considered by the Council mem- 
bers, and the delegates of some of the member nations took the suggestions offered 
and officially presented them in the form of proposals. The form and extent of 
these proposals may be seen by comparing the April 1948 Statute with the new 
Statute adopted in April 1950, and also by studying the considerations and sugges- 
tions of the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem as given in Bishop Tiran's state- 
ments, particularly the second and subsequent ones. 

When the second reading of the Statute was concluded and the articles were 
voted upon, Bishop Tiran left Geneva (March 24) for the Near East to take part 
in the religious festivities of Holy Week in Jerusalem, and to confer with ecclesiastics 
and statesmen in various countries on matters relating to the Jerusalem Armeniar 
Patriarchate, the life of Armenian colonies and the internationalization of the 
Holy City. 

On his way to Beirut the Bishop stopped (March 25) for a two-hour visit at 
the Diocesan Offices in Cairo, where he took occasion to confer with Archbishop 
Mampre. At Antelias, Lebanon, he was a guest for three days of His Holiness 
Catholicos Garegin, and celebrated the liturgy in the Cathedral of St. Gregory 
the Illuminator on the occasion of the annual pilgrimage to the Holy See of Cilicia. 
During that period he also conferred with the director of the Monastery and the 
Seminary, and addressed the students and seminarists. In Beirut he had special 
talks with the president of the American University and the ministers of the 
United States and the Kingdom of Jordan. At Amman, capital of the Kingdom of 
Jordan, he visited the local church and school. 

In Jerusalem, where he remained ten days (April 1-11), he took part in the 
Easter festivities and called upon the Greek Patriarch, the Latin Patriarch, the 
Minister of Great Britain, the Governor-General of Palestine, who is the personal 
representative of His Majesty King Abdullah of Jordan. With ail these personages 
Bishop Tiran conferred on matters pertaining to Jerusalem. 

He also visited the principal establishments of the Armenian Monastery, the 
Printing Press, the Gulbenkian Library, and the Seminary, where he addressed the 
seminarists and assembled guests. He found that despite conditions of distress the 
Brotherhood was faithfully carrying on its responsibilities in the Holy See. 

At Homs, on his way to Aleppo, the Bishop had a personal interview with His 
Beatitude Patriarch Efrem of the Syrian Orthodox Church, with whom he discussed 
the situation in the Holy City and matters concerning the Armenian, Syrian, and 
sister churches. In London, on his way back to the United States, Bishop Tiran saw 
the Archbishop of Canterbury as well as Archbishop Germanos, the Greek Exarch 
of Western Europe, discussing with both the issues pertaining to his mission. On 
May 6 he returned to New York, and shortly after reported to the Diocesan Central 

Secretary of the Diocese of the 
Armenian Church in North America 
New York 
May 18, 1950 



Letter Regarding the New Jerusalem Plan 

To the Editor of the Herald Tribune:'^ 

Every true Christian, Moslem, and Jew must have read with concern the report 
of the request which eighty-five prominent Americans have made in a letter to 
President Truman on the question of the plan of internationalization of Jerusalem. 

The question of Jerusalem must be viewed with full knowledge of the history 
of the Holy Places in Jerusalem, of the status quo now obtaining in Jerusalem, of 
the standing and interests of the various religious faiths and their institutions in 
the Holy City, and the practical possibilities for solving the Jerusalem question on 
a realistic and fair and equitable basis. 

The letter mentioned above has been reported as referring to the "Catholic, 
Protestant, Jewish, Greek Orthodox and Moslem Faiths" constituting the elements 
in Jerusalem which would form the proposed commission having wide powers over 
the Holy Places and being responsible to the Security Council. 

The problem is too complex to lend itself to a discussion in the framework of 
a letter. However^ the following points could briefly be made for the sake of a fair 
presentation of the case. 

The proposal made in the letter ignores at least one of the major religious 
communities in Jerusalem — the Armenian Patriarchate — which has a history of at 
least thirteen hundred years in Jerusalem, which is one of the three major partners 
in the international Christian Holy Places in the City, which for about a thousand 
years has been in possession of about one-sixth of the Old City, and which has the 
largest national minority in the City under its jurisdiction, and which occupies the 
most important Holy Place in Jerusalem outside the international Holy Places 
directly connected with the ministry of Jesus. It also ignores the bishoprics of the 
^ancient churches of the East, in Jerusalem, i.e., the Syrian, the Coptic and the 
Abyssinian Churches. 

The letter mentions the Protestants as if these were one coherent element 
capable of unified representation. It confuses the different categories of religious 
elements in the Holy City and classifies the various professions of the same faith on 
the same level with the three principal faiths having claims on Jerusalem. 

To say the least, it is doubtful whether a commission composed of the repre- 
sentatives of religious faiths or institutions could wield political power in Jerusalem, 
acting under the Security Council. It is at least doubtful whether the United 
Nations machinery could, within the terms of its reference, create an organ within 
itself dealing with essentially religious matters and with relationships between re- 
ligious bodies. 

^The passages in italics were not included in the Tribune, which gave the letter a promi- 
nent place, and added the sub-title: "Proposal on Internationalization of the City Ignores 
Armenian Patriarchate, Bishop says." 



All the principal Holy Places, Christian, Moslem, and Jewish, are situated in 
that part of the Holy City which is now occupied by the forces of the Hashemite 
Kingdom of Jordan. There is no reason to believe that the Jordan government 
would not fully respect the sanctity of these Holy Places and^ would prevent free 
access to them. The letter says that the proposed commission "should authenticate 
the Holy Sites in Jerusalem." But history and the status quo have already authenti- 
cated these sites and a new authentication is quite superfluous, apart from being 
impossible. As to the fourth "function" of the proposed commission, there is no need 
for an international supervision over the restoration of the Holy Places damaged 
during the war in Jerusalem, first because the principal international Holy Placef 
have suffered no appreciable damage and, secondly, if any Holy Place has suffered 
damage, it can and certainly should be repaired by the owner or owners of such 
Holy Place. Therefore, if the City is going to remain divided, there is no need for 
an inter-confessional commission. 

It should be noted that the preoccupation behind the resolution of the UN 
Gteneral Assembly concerning Jerusalem presumably was (a) that the Holy City, 
being sacred to the three great religions of the world and the followers of these 
religions having interest in it, the City should be under international administration, 
and (b) that a divided Jerusalem would not be viable, and the inclusion of the City 
in one or other of the two adjoining states would not be possible, and that therefore 
Jerusalem should be made into an international Corpus Separatum. 

The problem fundamentally is not the protection of the physical structure of 
the Holy Places, which would be secure, one could venture to say, under any 
administration. The problem is the preservation of the unity of the City in order 
to make it viable and to allow the religious life and activity of the many institutions 
in the City to develop and function freely and to the fullest extent. 

Bishop Tiran 

Representative of the Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem 
before the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations 
May 29, 1950 

2"or" in Tribune. 


Biographical Sketches 

By A. Meliksetian 
His Beatitude Cyril II, Patriarch of Jerusalem^ 

His Beatitude Cyril (Guregh) II, Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem, died on 
October 28, 1949 in Beirut, Lebanon, where he had undergone an operation. 

Patriarch Cyril was born in New Julfa, Iran, on January 6, 1894, the son of 
Rev. Mashdots Israelian, a priest of the Armenian Church. He was baptized as 
Tigran, and lived under that name until he took holy orders. After receiving his 
elementary education in the local schools, 1900-1907, he was sent to Madras, India, 
near his father, where he continued his studies in St. Joseph's French School. In 
1908 he went to Calcutta for his secondary and higher education — in the Armenian 
Academy and the University of Calcutta, graduating from both in 1911 and 1912, 
respectively; and in 1914, from the divinity school of the University. 

The outbreak of the war in 1914 interrupted his plans to enter the priesthood of 
his church. In 1915 he was invited to teach in the Armenian Academy in Calcutta, 
of which he became acting principal the following year. 

In 1916 when Patriarch Torgom arrived in India as CathoHcal Delegate to the 
Armenians in that country, Tigran, whose good work as educator became known, 
was asked to accompany him as his personal secretary on the rest of his mission in 
India and Egypt. 

Later, from 1918 to 1921 Tigran again went into teaching, this time at the 
Kalousdian High School in Cairo, Egypt, meanwhile serving as secretary of the 
local diocese of the Armenian Church. 

In September 1921, however, he again accompanied the Patriarch, this time 
to Jerusalem in connection with the transfer there of Armenian orphans from 
Mesopotamia. In Jerusalem Tigran entered the Brotherhood of the Monastery, 
was ordained a deacon two months later, and started teaching in the Patriarchal 
seminary. Then followed a series of promotions, commissions and new duties and 
distinctions in quick succession: assistant secretary of the General Assembly of the 
Brotherhood (1922), ordained archimandrite as Cyril by His Beatitude Patriarch 
Tourian (July 10, 1923), custodian of the library of manuscripts and vardapet 
(1925), member of the Synod (1929), principal of the Seminary (1930), member of 
the Treasury Council (1933), grand sacristan (1939), delegate to Echmiadzin at the 
election of the Catholicos, and Bishop-elect (1941), acting Patriarch (July 1944), 
and Patriarch of Jerusalem on October 20, 1944. 

Patriarch Cyril II was a man of unusual abilities and a courageous leader. He 
gave full evidence of his qualities of responsible leadership particularly during the 
struggle in Palestine in the past few years, when with fatherly concern and dauntless 
courage he gathered under his refuge the stricken Armenians, reduced once more 
to the status of refugees, providing them with shelter, protection and sustenance. 

^See p. [132] of Frontispiece for a photograph of His Beatitude. 



sharing with them their sufferings and caUing on Armenians everywhere to aid him 
in the work of salvation. His premature death has been attributed to his heroic 
efforts to save both people and institutions under his care amidst the most trying cir- 
cumstances created by both sides in the Arab- Jewish struggle. No other ecclesiastic 
of equal rank went through as much, worked with the same seemingly inexhaustible 
energy, and sacrificed himself as he did. According to the testimony of distinguished 
Americans on the scene, Patriarch Cyril stood out as the foremost ecclesiastic and 
leader among his colleagues of other nationalities in Jerusalem.^ 

Here is how Dr. Carl Hermann Voss described him, after an audience with the 
Patriarch in the summer of 1947: 

"When Mrs. Voss and I arrived we were ushered to a spacious hall, at one end 
of which stood an ecclesiastical throne. The building was beautiful and the hall was 
decorated with unusual oil paintings of former Patriarchs, porcelain and other art 
objects. The Patriarch entered in complete regalia. With his thick flowing beard, 
elaborate robes and beautiful jewel-studded cross hanging from a chain on his chest, 
His Beatitude was indeed as handsome a man as I have ever seen. He impressed us 
at first as being a venerable old man, but the more we talked, the younger he grew 
in our sight. He is full of zest and youthful spirit. He was exceedingly gracious to 
Mrs. Voss, with whom he made more of a hit than any other man we met on this 
trip — among them were Jan Christian Smuts in South Africa and Adolph Keller 
in Geneva. 

"The Patriarch is well aware and deeply appreciative of the work and leaders 
of the Armenian National Council of America and the American Church Com- 
mittee for Armenia. 

"He is in command of a beautiful, classical English. His sentences are precise. 
He has an excellent choice of words, a clear pronunciation. 

"He gave us a very interesting account of the Armenian Church, pointing out 
that it had made pilgrimages to the Holy City, Jerusalem, before any other church 
group in the world. 

"He was very reserved in discussing international issues, but did point out that 
his people were getting along nicely and were receiving just treatment within the 
Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. He was anxious to learn about America, and 
when at the end of an hour's interview, we attempted to take our leave, he chided 
us with the remark, 'You Americans are always in a hurry!' 

"I was fortunate in being able to take a picture of His Beatitude on the back 
roof of the Patriarchate. He invited us to visit him again."^ 

At the funeral rites many leading laymen, ecclesiastics, and public officials bore 
witness to the great loss which the Armenians in the Diaspora had sustained by the 
untimely death of the young Patriarch. His body was interred in the Court of the 
Cathedral of St. James in Jerusalem on November 3 before high dignitaries of church 
and state. Catholicos Garegin Hovsepian of Cilicia, together with other noted 
Armenians accompanied the coffin from Beirut. The funeral procession started at 

2S. H. T. "Patriarch Guregh II Israelian," Baikar, November 3, 1949, p. 2. 

STaken from Press Release No. 9 of the American Church Committee for Armenia, New York, 
February 18, 1948. 



Ammaiij proceeded by way of the Austrian Hospice and Via Dolorosa, passing the 
Seven Stations of the Cross, through the Christian quarter to the Jaffa Gate, then 
by the Citadel of David, and on to the Armenian Monastery. 

Most of the stores along the path of the procession were closed in honor of the 
deceased, and in the prevailing silence the chanting of the dirges and the tolling of 
the church bells of Jerusalem, including that of the Holy Sepulcher, filled the air 
with solemn strains of the auspicious farewell. Policemen, boy scouts, bearers of 
wreaths preceded the procession of choristers, deacons and priests. Catholicos 
Garegin followed the casket accompanied by representatives of various religious 
groups and heads of the Moslem Supreme Council. Other dignitaries marched next, 
followed by a company of about seven thousand mourners. 

The body was in state in St. James Cathedral through the night. At the funeral 
services the following day, November 3, Archbishop Mampre Sirounian officiated, 
and Catholicos Garegin gave the eulogy. Among the celebrities present were : Jamal 
Bey Tokan on behalf of His Majesty King Abdullah, Mr. Jose Quimper representing 
the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine, the consular corps of 
Britain, France, Italy, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Spain, delegates of the Inter- 
national Red Cross of Geneva, and other government and civic leaders. 

Arshag Mahdesian 

Arshag Mahdesian, well-known Armenian leader and editor, died in Fresno, 
California, on April 4 at the age of seventy-seven. He was born in Palou, Armenia 
in 1873. Upon graduating from Euphrates College in 1896, he taught at that in- 
stitution for four years, until 1900, when he came to the United States. Here he 
studied at Yale for a while, and married. 

Later with his wife, Christine, a cultured American who learned to speak 
and write in the Armenian language, he published The New Armenia, in English, 
and Ardziv and other periodicals in Armenian. Mr. Mahdesian was a man of vision, 
courage, and had a keen sense of justice.^ His life was one long urge "to get the Eng- 
lish-speaking public acquainted with the soul of the Armenian people — ^its history, 
its literature, its cause, and its aspirations."^ 

The New Armenia first appeared as a monthly in Boston, Mass. in 1904, under 
the name of Armenia; and continued under that of The New Armenia during the 
first World War and after. Among its honorary editors were Julia Ward Howe, 
Alice Stone Blackwell, Rev. Charles Gordon Ames, Edward H. Clement, editor of 
the Boston Evening Transcript, Professor Albert C. Cook, William Lloyd Garrison, 
James Bronson Reynolds, Professor William G. Ward and several other distinguished 
personalities of the period. European honorary editors were Anatole France, Georges 
Clemenceau, and Victor Berard. The publication was suspended from September 
1907 to April 1910, and from October 1913 to January 1914 inclusive. From 1915 

^Cf. reference to his relations with Vickery and the question of relief versus independence for 
the Armenians, supra, p. 143. 

2A. A. Bedikian, "Salesmen of A Precious Spirit," The Armenian Mirror-Spectator, July 15, 
1950, vol. XIII, p. 1. 



to October 1917 it was published as a semi-monthly and became a monthly 
again in November 1917. The New Armenia ceased publication with the July- 
September 1929 issue. 

A copy of the magazine went to every member of Congress and other dis- 
tinguished leaders in the United States and abroad. It was a costly enterprise — 
costly in money, human effort and resourcefulness, and heroic sacrifice. That is the 
story back of the checkered life of the publication. It could not have been supported 
by subscriptions. The Armenian-American community was too yoimg to have 
developed a sufficient number of English-speaking readers to underwrite it on a 
business basis. What made the publication possible was the grim, steadfast spirit 
of Mr. and Mrs. Mahdesian and a small band of faithful un-publicized sponsors, 
who gave unstintingly, repeatedly, patiently, so that Armenia's cavise would not be 
forgotten by default of Armenians themselves. Among this small group was Mr. 
Ashod Tiryakian,^ the brother of Mihrtad, distinguished member on the editorial 
advisory board of Armenian Affairs. 

The Mahdesians, of course, gave most for they gave their all to it. They "lived 
in a single room," says Mr. Bedikian, who knew tlie couple well. "They spent no 
money on themselves for the barest necessities . . . starving half the time to keep 
the publication going." Mrs. Mahdesian "devoted herself to the pursuits of her hus- 
band, willingly and uncompromisingly suffering with him every imaginable depriva- 
tion until her death some fifteen years ago. All the years I had known her I never 
saw her with a new hat . . . year in and year out she wore the same hat until she 
seemed a bizarre phenomenon in the streets of New York. That was merely a visible 
indication of the deprivations both endured. But no one knew when they went 
without food or adequate meals. Some of us knew that secret of their lives, too."* 

Christine Mahdesian "lavished more love upon the nation of her adoption than 
thousands of Armenian-born women have done, or would be willing to do. And she 
did give up all that there was in her noble soul without claiming credit for so 
generous a gift. . . . She wanted to remain behind the scenes. . . . When she was 
laid to rest, at her simple funeral there were only a dozen people."** 

After her death, Mr. Mahdesian, broken-down and broken-hearted, moved to 
Fresno, California where he taught citizenship and English. In 1941 he was elected 
member to Eugene Field, prominent authors' society, in recognition of his book, 
Armenia, Her Culture and Aspirations. 

Mr. Mahdesian was invited to serve on the board of editorial advisers of this 
journal, but due to change of address or some other error the letter was never re- 
ceived by him. He was an enthusiastic delegate to the World Armenian Congress in 
1947; and there is little doubt what his answer to the invitation of the journal would 
have been had he lived. 

As a memorial to the thankless but important work done by Mr. Arshag 

SAshod, says Mr. Bedikian, was "a rare spirit who had a quick eye in recognizing merit. 
He was in a class by himself for understanding, generosity and patriotism." Ihid. 





Mahdesian and his faithful wife Christine, an editorial article which appeared in 
the March 1919 issue of The New Armenia on "Theodore Roosevelt and Armenia" 
is reprinted on another page of this issue of Armenian Affairs. An English transla- 
tion of his brief address to the World Armenian Congress on May 3, 1947, in the 
Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York, will be published in the next issue. 

Artak Darbinian 

Artak Darbinian, editor and public figure among Armenians in Diaspora, died 
in Paris, France, on February 27 at the age of seventy-one. He was bom in Van, 
Armenia in 1879. After starting his education in his native city, he found his way 
to Persia, and thence entered the Georgian Seminary in Echmiadzin. He was thus 
away during the massacres of 1895-1896, when the province of Van, together with 
the other Armenian provinces in Turkey, lost 300,000 souls; and thousands of homes, 
churches and monasteries were levelled to the ground. The city of Van itself, how- 
ever, escaped the carnage due to the magnificent organized self-defense under the 
leadership of the local political parties. 

In the years that followed, Van with its outlying districts became an active 
intellectual center. With its large Armenian population, the need for leadership 
was great, and Artak was invited by the local diocese of the Armenian Church to 
come and teach in the Zharangavorats seminary of Varaga Vank. Though he had 
entertained dreams of further preparation in higher learning, he responded to the 
call to teach at Varaga Vank, of which school he later became the principal.^ He 
continued as teacher and principal until World War I. During that period he also 
edited the newspaper Van Tosp, which was later re-established in Tiflis. In 1918 
he edited ^hoghouurdi Dsayn (The People's Voice), daily newspaper in Yerevan, 
and Apaga (Future), weekly in Paris. He contributed many articles to Armenian 
papers in the Diaspora: and in 1947 published in Paris his book, Hai Azatagrakan 
Sharzhman Oreren (Notes from the Days of the Armenian Emancipation Move- 
ment), 1890-1940, 392 p. 

He was fully qualified to write such a book. He had been a member of the 
Armenakan Party, which had its origin on the soil where Armenians had been sub- 
jugated to oppression by their Turkish overlords for centuries, and therefore a party 
fully cognizant of the local needs and opportunities for emancipation, in contrast 
to those political organizations which had their origin on foreign soil and were led 
by "foreign" political adventurers. Artak Darbinian had also been the dominant and 
weighty member at the second regional convention for Armenia of the Ramkavar 
(Democratic) Party, which convened in Yerevan in 1919, from December 21 to 27. 
This was to be expected, considering his experience in political life, his serious bent 
of mind, and his ability to grasp the significance of events. The convention was to 
discuss the stand of the party toward the regime then in power in Armenia, which 
under Dashnag leadership was leading the country to its doom through mismanage- 

iFrom reprint of biographical sketch by H. B. of Abaka in Baikar, June 3, 1950, p. 1. 



ment and high-handed methods, a fact which events later confirmed.^ The follow- 
ing year, in 1920, Darbinian was a delegate from Armenia to the third general con- 
vention of the Party, which met in Constantinople (Istanbul). 

After World War II he served as chairman of the Armenian Repatriation Com- 
mittee of France. This was a natural assignment to him, even though in ill-health, as 
he firmly believed that the only logical place for Armenians dispersed throughout the 
world was the Armenian republic at the foot of Ararat. He did not regard the 
Armenian Soviet Republic as the "lesser of two evils," as some "patriots" wish to 
regard it, as a lever against the onslaught of the current anti-Soviet hysteria, or as 
a concession to ideological conviction. He was convinced that the present order 
in Armenia was the best guarantee for the full creative development of his people. 

In a letter to a friend in the United States shortly before his death, he wrote: 
"My heart is full of disquiet ... I can see before my eyes Turkish Armenia, in the 
full sense of the word a wasteland divested of all its native elements, and the surviv- 
ing remnants doomed to disappearance, with coercion, in the countries which 
have offered them refuge. Whether we liked it or not, we had to accept the condi- 
tions imposed upon us by the United States, France and Britain. Whether we 
like it or not, in fifty years the Armenian name will disappear in these countries. 
... If there is a comforting thought, that is the Armenia of today." ^ 


Leon Guerdan (born Gumushguerdan) author, journalist, and lecturer in 
America and France, died in New York on December 15, 1949, at the age of sixty- 
three. Born in Constantinople (Istanbul), the son of a businessman, he received 
his higher education in Robert College, and then moved to Paris for further educa- 
tion. After that he entered business. From the start, however, he impressed those 
who came to know him more as an intellectual than as a businessman. Not long 
after, Guerdan left the business world and gave himself to cultural, political and 
social pursuits. Since 1929 he had published five books, all in the French language. 
His volume dedicated to Dicran Yergat, Les Faux-Poids de la Balance, is regarded to 
be the best. The others are: The False Weights of the Scales; The Reveries of 
Bertran Berno; I Have Known Them All; and From the Bosporus to the Sky- 
scrapers, the last published in New York. 

After his arrival in the United States in 1941 with his family, Mr. Guerdan was 
for a time editor of France-Amerique, the French weekly published in New York. 
He has also translated into French Mrs. Sara Roosevelt's book. My Son, Franklin. 

At the time of his death Mr. Guerdan was vice-president of the Central Board 
of the Armenian General Benevolent Union, of which he had been treasurer for 
twenty years. When the Central Board moved from Cairo to Paris, France, Boghos 

2Rev. A. A. Georgizian, "Artak Darbinian — 'Worthy Son of Van.' Memoirs and Notes," VI, 
Baikar, April 2, 1950, p. 1. 

lAnushavan Der Megrdichian, "Artak Darbinian," Baikar, May 26, 1950, pp. 1 and 3. 

SAram Krikorian, "Artak Darbinian — A Bouquet to His Memory," Baikar, April 9, 1950, p. 1. 



Nubar Pasha, the founder of the AGBU, invited him to membership on the board. 
His principal interest in the work of the AGBU was cultural. He was especially 
interested in the Nubarian Library of Paris, of which he remained the head until his 
removal from Paris. According to a friend, he claimed to have given to Boghos 
Nubar the idea of the Armenian Home, a center of Armenian college and university 
students in Paris. In 1947 he was chairman of the AGBU one million dollar repatria- 
tion campaign. 

Mr. Guerdan was deeply interested in the political destiny of his people, and the 
welfare of his adopted country, France. His association with the France-Amerique 
as editor was in connection with the liberation of France from Nazi domination 
during the war years. Before the war he had been co-director of Les Conferences des 

From 1919 to 1922 Mr. Guerdan served as counselor of the Armenian delega- 
tion at the Peace Conference. In this he was closely associated with Boghos Nubar, 
and dedicated himself to make the claims and the aspirations of the Armenians 
known among the intellectual and political circles of France. Later, when K. 
Noradungian became the chairman of the Armenian delegation, Mr. Guerdan 
remained his counselor, and, after the dissolution of the delegation, served as 
member on the central committee devoted to the interests of Armenian immigrants. 
In 1947 when the World Armenian Congress was held in New York City Mr. 
Guerdan participated with interest. 

In 1934, after visiting Echmiadzin, in Soviet Armenia, in order to take part in 
the election of the Catholicos, Mr. Guerdan "found the Armenian spirit renewed 
within him. And he did not hesitate to bear witness in the interest of the Armenian 
cause, whenever it became necessary, among us [the Armenians], as well as among 
others." Thus spoke Hovhannes Boghosian, a friend in Paris, who had been in 
close touch with him during the past few summers when Guerdan visited the French 

Mr. Boghosian stated, on the basis of these contacts, that Mr. Guerdan under- 
stood the circumstances of America's present policy, and was sure that Armenians 
and their friends should continue to work in the interest of the Armenian cause 
even in Washington; at least they should keep in close touch with the American 
press. If Armenians, added this friend, had realized the importance and possessed 
the means of making his voice heard in international circles, through the publication 
of a periodical in the French or English language, Leon Guerdan would undoubtedly 
have been its editor.^ 

IHovhannes Boghosian, "Leon Guerdan," Baikar, January 5, 1950, p. 1. 


Books and Reviews 

Country Without Economic Backbone 

Reviewed by Emil Lengyel 

TURKEY. AN ECONOMIC APPRAISAL. By Max Weston Thomburg, Grajiam 
Spry and George Soule. New York, The Twentieth Century Fund, 1949. 
322 pages. $3.50. 

This book gives a complete picture of Turkish economic life in our days. It 
tells us how the people of Turkey live and work on their farms, operate their mines, 
industries, transportation systems, banks and foreign trade. 

The Armenians are mentioned in this book, since they were the most im- 
portant minority engaged in economic pursuits under the old Ottoman rule. When 
the Kemalist revolution came, it brought forward leaders who had belonged to the 
ruling class of the Sultan's realm, an official, land-owning or military oligarchy, 
which had never engaged in business and trade. These people looked down on the 
Armenians and Greeks, the authors tell us, and considered them an unwelcome, 
alien element. The reader is left with the impression that if these minorities with the 
economic know-how had not been eliminated, the economic condition of the Turk- 
ish republic might be far more favorable today. 

The authors describe the wealth of Turkey, a country of varied resources, 
natural and human, with rich mineral deposits and sources of mechanical power, 
with a good climate, lots of land and, above all, a population which can work, if 
there is an incentive. 

It is still an undeveloped country, we are shown. It has industries, but hardly 
any industrialization. Its factories are run at a loss, ambitious in design in some 
cases, but inefficient, poorly managed. The country's transportation is backward, its 
farming of the pre-Stone Age, except for a few exp^imental stations; the system of 
taxation is archaic. 

The raw material is there and the question is what to do with it. The authors 
recommend a policy of gradual growth. Roads must be built, because the country 
is stifled without them. Education and sanitation must be improved. The logical 
development of industrialization is to begin with small and light industries, such as 
foundries, machine shops, plants to produce simple farm tools, wagons and other 
indispensable means of transportation. The productiveness of the mines could be 
greatly improved. The heavy industries would follow logically in due time. Probably 
for reasons of prestige, modem Turkey started with heavy industries. 

The authors hold to the view that Turkey does not need too much outside 
capital. There is money in the country, but much of it is in hiding. The govem- 



ment could finance most, if not all, essential public activities. The greatest need 
the Turks themselves cannot fill at present is for competent managers, technicians, 
advisers, with plenty of industrial and commercial background. "This is a need 
which Americans can supply, provided the opportunity is offered for them to exer- 
cise their talents. Gk)vemment and private undertakings could engage Americans 
: with the required skill." 

These opportunities, however, will exist only if Turkish policy-makers change 
their attitude, so that the national economy is not operated, as at present, for the 
benefit of bureaucrats and politicians, but for the bulk of the producing and con- 
suming population. Harassing taxes must be abolished, capricious rulings must be 
eliminated, favoritism must be ended and the invasion of managerial responsibility 
by the government must be avoided by all means. 

Two of the authors of the book had personal contacts with the Near and Middle 
East. Max Weston Thomburg, research director of this volume, is described as 
chairman for many years of the Board of Engineers of the Standard Oil Company of 
California, and Vice-President in charge of its Middle and Far East subsidiaries. 
Mr. Graham Spry, the research associate, was personal assistant to Sir Stafford 
Cripps during the war and his companion in his historic mission to India. Because 
of Mr. Thomburg's close association with the petroleum industry, it seems to be 
strange that he should have overlooked important recent oil developments in Turkey. 

The Twentieth Century Fund is to be congratulated on this undertaking. Its 
Executive Director, Evans Clark, tells the reader in a Foreword that this study on 
Turkey and a similar one on Brazil have been designed as pilot projects for the 
production of the intellectual raw material out of which a more effective United 
States foreign policy may be fashioned. If that means that the Fund will undertake 
to publish similar studies for several important foreign countries it will render a 
great public service. 

The Armenian Question in Paris in 1919* 

Reviewed by C. P. Ives 

Stephen Bonsai, Suitors and Suppliants, The Little Nations at Versailles. With 
an Introduction by Arthur Krock. New York, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1946. 301 p. 


N Suitors and Suppliants Colonel Stephen Bonsai assigns the Biblical name of 
"Naboth's vineyard" to the Ukraine of 1919. Actually his book is the story of 
many Naboths, many covetous Ahabs, many Jezebels working wrongful conveyances. 
For this is the account of the victimized small nations at Paris in 1918 and 1919, 
and of their efforts there to secure that literal justice which the great American 
President had pledged in the most explicit terminology. 

^With the courtesy of The Baltimore Evening Sun. 



As readers of his earlier book, Unfinished Business, will recall, Colonel Bonsai 
was Colonel House's right hand man at Versailles. He kept the door to American 
headquarters and in that key place had the delicate and strenuous work of sifting 
all the suitors and their demands, of composing both pleas and pleaders for their 
several appearances before what Bonsai calls the Great Assizes, the court of the 
leaders of the great powers. 

Like Wilson himself. Bonsai was devoted to the small peoples. This book, like 
the earlier one, consists of transcripts from the diary he kept during those days and 
the entries have the warmth and candor of informal writing. The good colonel felt 
the force of pleas rooted in logic and historic fitness; but time and again, and much 
more often than not, he saw, as well, how pitifully weak were the suitors and sup- 
pliants in the practical weapons of power politics. 

Here, for instance, at Paris in 1919, were the Slovaks, desperately led by 
Father Hlinka, and fully as fearful of the Czechs as they were of the Germans, 
their late enemy. Masaryk and Benes were in Paris and talked much of the future 
of the new Czechoslovak Republic. Masaryk was worried about the German-Czechs 
in the Sudeten mountains, but proposed to forbid their removal to Germany 
proper. Benes thought it might be possible to secure their loyalty to the new state. 

D'Annunzio was embarked on his crazy adventure into Fiume in those days, and 
the raid was so popular with the Italian people that the Italian Prime Minister, 
Orlando, was driven to extreme territorial demands at Paris. Clemenceau warned 
that the Italians were indiscreet in inviting the enmity of the new kingdom of the 
Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and saw an eventful explosion in that part of the world 
whose major city then as now was Trieste, 

Bonsai gives vivid pictures of Emir Feisal, Arab commander under AUenby, 
making his demands for Arab emancipation at Paris and warning the western 
nations against favor to the Zionists in Palestine. Much farther east, the troubles 
of Korea were brought before the conference by a delegation which could not sup- 
press its chagrin that Japan, arch aggressor and tyrant over their race, should have a 
major and honored place at the peace table. Naturally the Chinese shared this 

Lord Milner, of the British delegation in 1918, thought that Germany, though 
beaten, ought to be permitted to retain some armaments, just in case the Bol- 
sheviks should attempt any general penetration westward into the European con- 
tinent. Other Englishmen were eager to give Silesia to Germany so that that 
industrial area would help balance the great industries in northern France. 

As the diary proceeds. Bonsai's heat and his hopelessness rise by equal steps. 
He comes to some kind of a climax in both when he reaches the unhappy story of 
the Armenians. Their spokesman, at Paris in 1919, was Boghos Nubar Pasha. He 
insisted on starting the Armenian chronicle with the Hittites of ancient Palestine, 
from whom he insisted the Armenians derived. But the American colonel insisted 
on some kind of a statute of limitations in this tragic account and was content to 
begin with the year 1878. That was the date, he reminded the British Lord Bryce, 
of the Treaty of Berlin, underwritten by the British, the French, the Russians, etc., 
in which the Armenians were promised an end of their long servitude to the Turk. 



It was in this year, of course, that the Russians seized the province of Kars as part 
of the booty of their recent victory over Turkey. In response to this move, the 
British entered into a deal with Turkey against Russia. 

Two years later, in 1880, the powers protested to the Turkish Sultan that he was 
not abiding by the terms of the Berlin undertaking. Largely because of the Anglo- 
Turkish deal, nothing happened. In 1894-1896 came the terrible Turkish massacres 
of the Armenians. These events were cited twenty years later when, in 1916, Britain 
and France promised freedom for the Armenians. 

Despite this Anglo-French pledge, however, it was the United States which 
the Supreme Council of Allies invited to assume a mandate over a liberated Armenia 
in 1920. This was after the Treaty of Versailles, in terms rather vaguer than those 
of 1878, had promoted the gist of the 1878 promise. In 1920 the Treaty of Sevres 
included a similar pledge by the puppet Sultan of Turkey. But he was soon over- 
turned and his pledges revoked by Mustafa Kemal and his Turkish revolution. 
It was Kemal who got back all Turkish territory held in 1914, plus the province of 
Kars, which Russia had seized in 1878. The Treaty of Lausanne (1923), says 
Colonel Bonsai, "consecrated the Turkish triumph. . . ." And now the unhappy 
Armenians and the province of Kars have once more come back in the news. 

For this, of course, is what Colonel Bonsai is driving at — that our present 
troubles in many instances stem back to troubles which were considered at Versailles, 
but left unsettled. Again and again the author reports the easy gestures with which 
the great powers dismissed the plaints of the small peoples in 1919 — that these 
minor issues and tag-ends of the old disputes could be adjusted later via the ma- 
chinery to be built at Versailles. The colonel's point is that this just didn't happen, 
and that little pinpoints of unrest festered at length into great crises and dreadful 

Colonel Bonsai can hardly be called a killjoy, since there was little joy in the 
world outlook even before his book appeared. But he does not make our present 
difficulties any easier to bear though he does make many of them easier to under- 


Letters to the Editor 

Congratulatory Notes 

Editor Armenian Affairs'. 

Congratulations on the fine first issue of Armenian Affairs. It is an excellent 
piece of work and I shall be very glad to arrange an exchange with The Journal of 
Bible and Religion. 

— ^Garl E. Purinton 
Editor The Journal of Bible and Religion 
Organ of the National Association of Biblical Instructors 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

Judging by these examples [in the first issue of the journal] I feel confident that 
you are launching Armenian Affairs under very auspicious beginnings. These 
articles make excellent and valuable reading. 

— Abraham A. Neuman 
Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 


— ^Reinhold Niebuhr 
Professor Union Theological Seminary 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

Publications such as yours bring prestige to the Armenian name. 

— P. K. Thomajan 
Author, Carlstadt, N. J. 

Editor Aimeriian Affairs: 

The magazine is made up in the grand manner, good paper, good type, good 
reproductions. All the articles I have read have a high standard. The beginning 
seems to be good and I hope the sequel will be no less satisfactory. 

— Emil Lenoyel 
Associate Professor of Education, New York University 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

I note with satisfaction that the next number will contain considerable ma- 
terial on archeological work. I was particularly interested in the review of Mr. 
Tokarsky's book, The Architecture of Ancient Armenia, in the first issue. 

— Eric King 
Archeologist, London, England 



Editor Armenian Affairs : 

We enjoyed reading every article in tiie first issue and trust that you will 
continue this worthwhile publication and be able to maintain the high standard 
of its scholarly contents. 

— ^Zareh Tatarian 

San Francisco, Calif. 

Editor Armenian Affairs : 

Read the first issue of Armenian Affairs with great interest and satisfaction. 
There is a definite need for this type of publication at present. The Armenian 
National Council is to be congratulated for its manifold and extremely valuable 
services to our cause which require so much heart and mind in these difficult times. 

— Ephraim K. JernaziaNj Pastor, 
Armenian Euphrates Evangelical Church, Providence, R. I. 

Million Armenian Martyrs Articulate 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

Please enter nine subscriptions to Armenian Affairs on my account, one for 
myself, and eight as follows: two for two Senators, four for four Congressmen of 
the United States Congress; one for the University of Mississippi Library; and two 
for the editors of two leading newspapers of the capital city of my state. 

Words cannot express my delight in your publication. It is the finest and 
the best yet seen in the field of magazine publication in behalf of Armenia. It is 
worthy to be on the desk of every editor of any major newspaper in America, in 
the hands of every senator and congressman in the United States, and on the 
shelves of the libraries of all the great universities. 

It seems to me, more than a million Armenian martyrs have at last become 
articulate. This publication is their voice speaking to the conscience of humanity 
kept silent for a long time by power, diplomacy and duplicity. 


Formerly Instructor in the University of Maine 

It May Move the Stony Hearts 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

I read the first issue of your new periodical with a thrill. I am certain that 
Armenian Affairs will become an enduring monument for the defense of the Ar- 
menian cause. Who knows, it may move the stony hearts of those on whose sense 
of justice our cause depends. In addition to that, Armenian Affairs will become an 
effective instrument in conveying to our youth the spiritual values of our people for 
the conservation of which our fathers preferred martyrdom. 

— Garabed Kalfayan, Pastor, 
Armenian Church, Yettem, Calif. 



Hopeful Days Ahead 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

While praising your worthy attempt at creating such a publication, the real 
benefit of it is doubtful as past similar experiences testify. We had had similar pub- 
lications during the last fifty years, both in the English and French languages, and 
yet look at our national condition which became worse and worse, not to say pitiable, 
due to the treachery of civilized (?) diplomacy. I subscribe to it in the hope that 
the next fifty years of the twentieth century may give us a little consolation. 

Just a little advice: Please leave out the religious stuff. The average Deader is 
tired of reading that we were the first nation to adopt Christianity; that our Bible 
is the "queen of translations"; that we have been persecuted for our belief, and 
the like. Fifty years ago there was some excuse for such statements when they 
appeared at length in the Pro Armenia in France, in The New Armenia in America, 
and numerous other publications. The most we can expect in answer from the 
great diplomats of our day would be "so what?" Yes, so what? We are all Christians 
but the national interests of all governments today are above Christianity.^ 

— ^DiKRAN Spear 

Weehawken, N. J. 

250,000 Armenians in Turkish Occupied Armenia? 

Editor Armenian Affairs: 

I would like to suggest that the Armenian National Council offer copies of its 
journal to British institutions and journals of high standing, such as the Royal 
Institute's International Affairs, for exchange with their publications.^ 

On page 263 of Pearse's Three Years in the Levant, reviewed in the last issue 
of your journal, the author states, "There are still 250,000 in Turkish Armenia, 
whose capital is Erzeroum." This is, of course, an impossible figure for the number 
of Armenians in Turkish Occupied Armenia, but it might be useful to know where 
this figure was obtained. 

— ^Edward V. Gulbenkian 
London, England 

iQr shouldn't we say "sub-Christian" ? — Ed. 

2Mr. Gulbenkian has already placed Armenian Affairs in several of the most important 
libraries and educational institutions in Britain. — Ed. 



^^Armenia to the Armenians^^ 

Editor Armenian Aj fairs'. 

Writing in The Nation of August 7, 1948 on "The Wallace Party," Howard K. 
Smith had this to say about some of the slogans on the walls at the Progressive Party's 
Convention: "Scanning the forest of posters in the hall, the eye jarred against exotic 
slogans like, 'Armenia to the Armenians' ; it was impossible not to wonder how many 
Middle-Western pulses would rise to correct this manifest injustice in November." 

I have no idea how many Armenians or others in this country voted the Wallace 
ticket in order to secure justice for the Armenians. But an intelligent public should 
know something of the historic background of this "exotic" slogan. 

Armenia is a small mountainous country in the Caucasus, on the slopes of Mt. 
Ararat. Overrun in the twelfth century by Turkish invaders from central Asia, the 
country has suffered misrule and persecution at the hand of its Turkish conquerors 
ever since; but like the Greeks, the Irish, the Jews, under similar circumstances, the 
Armenians have never relinquished their culture and their hope of freedom. 

In 1878, one-fifth of the ancient Armenian homeland (excluding Cilicia, where 
an Armenian kingdom flourished for about two centuries at the time of the Cru- 
sades) was taken from the Turk by Russia; but the bulk of the country, as well as 
Cilicia, has remained under Turkish rule. And, notorious as was Tsarist mis- 
government, the lot of the Armenian in Russian Armenia was very much better 
than that of the Armenians in Turkey. 

During World War I the Turks sought to settle the Armenian question by 
exterminating the Armenian population of their country. It is estimated that during 
and after 1915 nearly a million Armenians were done to death, while another million 
were exiled or fled to countries in the Near East, the Balkans, France, and the 
Americas. The lot of the Armenian refugees in these countries has, in various degrees, 
been miserable — "D.P.'s" for over thirty years, while the few who remain in Turkey 
lead a barely tolerable existence. 

One of Wilson's "Fourteen Points" for the settlement of World War I was the 
independence of Armenia; and in 1919 the European Allies (the U. S. had not 
declared war against Turkey) asked Wilson to draw the boundaries of the free 
Armenia that was to be set up in the eastern provinces of Asia Minor, and the 
recognition of Armenia's independence was included in the Treaty of Sevres, which 
the delegates of the Ottoman Empire signed. But the nationalist movement under 
Mustafa Kemal deposed the Sultan, proclaimed a "republic," and repudiated the 
treaty. In 1923 a new treaty was signed at Lausanne in which the question of 
Armenia's independence was ignored. Once again the Armenians were betrayed 
by the Christian democracies of Europe and left to their fate by America, whose 
missionaries had taught them to admire and love what the America of Washing- 
ton and Lincoln stood for. 

Between the two world wars the question of Armenia's liberation from the Turk 
remained quiescent. But with the close of World War II a group of Americans of 
Armenian ancestry, with the cooperation of a large number of other Americans, 



raised the question of the implementation of the "Wilson Award." This is what 
the slogan, "Armenia to the Armenians," means. Many still recall the massacres of 
Armenians in 1895-96, in 1908, and in 1915, which aroused the horror and sympathy 
of the western world, and especially of this country, since we had established mis- 
sions in Turkey several generations earlier and were intimately acquainted with the 
deplorable conditions in that country from the testimony of American eye-witnesses. 
To these, and to the Americans of Armenian ancestry, the slogan, "Armenia to the 
Armenians," does not sound exotic. For the Armenian refugees dispersed through- 
out the Near East as well as Armenians remaining In Turkey are still suffering pov- 
erty and the indignities heaped on minorities in those countries. And while most 
of the Armenians in America have probably no more intention of returning to Ar- 
menia, should it be liberated, than Irish- Americans had of returning to Ireland 
when that country secured its independence, or American Jews to Israel (for their 
land would not have room for all of their scattered brethren throughout the world), 
American-Armenians are nevertheless greatly interested in the fate of their less 
fortunate fellows in the Near East and are, therefore, once more raising the question 
of the implementation of the "Wilson Award." 

Armenian Affairs should prove of great value in bringing before Americans, of 
whatever race or national origin, the history and significance of the Armenian Ques- 
tion, so that it may no longer seem "exotic" to any of us. The independence of 
Armenia was not "exotic" to Wilson. Nor should it seem exotic to intelligent Amer- 
icans at least. 

— ^Lawson p. Chambers 
Washington University, St. Louis, Mo. 



Concerning Genocide 

In favor of the Ratification of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of 
the Crime of Genocide. Presented to The Subcommittee on the Genocide Con- 
vention of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Submitted by The Reverend 
Charles A. Vertanes, Executive Director, March 8, 1950.* 

Editorial Note 

This document was presented to the Sub-Committee on March 3, 1950. On 
June 14 a gentleman who claimed to be the architect of the Genocide Convention 
got in touch with the office of the Armenian National Council of America seeking 
support for the ratification of the Convention by Congress. A three hour interview 
ensued the following day with the Director of the Council. It was discouraging to 
learn that this gentleman was willing to accept support for his project from any 
source, preferably reactionary groups, including those who had worked with the 
Nazis during World War II. 

In the June issue of "Hairenik," official daily organ of the Armenian Revolu- 
tionary Federation (Dashnag), a brief letter, signed by one of the leaders of the 
Federation, addressed to U. S. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., urged him to 
support the ratification of the Convention in the Senate. It was mentioned in the 
paper that this was one of the appeals sent. 

The letter stated that the writer's family was one of the victims of genocide: 
"During the first World War I lost my father, my mother, four of my brothers, my 
grandmother, three of my uncles with their entire families, one aunt with her entire 
family: all the result of merciless mass murder. Aside from my sister and myself . . . 
out of our patriarchal family of more than fifty members, all were destroyed as a 
result of the massacres. If it had not been for this barbarous practice known as 
genocide, the greater part of my family except those who would have died a natural 
death, would have been alive today. What happened to me happened also to many 
thousands of other Armenian families." 

In the entire letter of four solid paragraphs there is not one single reference as 
to who were the perpetrators of this violence to the Armenians. This is a new kind 
of fight for "decency" in the world. It is not enough to talk about Turkish atrocities 
for Armenian consumption, as "Hairenik" did editorially a few days earlier. The 
truth must be proclaimed in season and out of season, everywhere, unstintingly, 

The Armenian National Council of America, the American Church Committee 
for Armenia and other organizations, both Armenian and American, devoted to the 
pursuit of justice and peace, will be no party to such worthless campaigns. 

If the Genocide Convention is to be ratified with tongue in cheek it will be a 
worthless scrap of paper. No sound world can be built on falsehood or suppressed 

•Published in The Genocide Convention — Hearings Before the Sub-Committee on Foreign 
Relations, United States Senate Eighty-first Congress, Second Session on Executive O. The 
International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Jan- 
uary 23, 24, 25 and February 9, 1950. Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign 
Relations, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C, 1950, pp. 548-555. 



Honorable Gentlemen: 

The Armenian National Council of America urges the ratification of the Convention 
on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. 

The Armenian National Council was organized in March, 1944 under the auspicious 
circumstances of the later stages of World War II. Among these the most hopeful 
were the reassuring declarations of leading Allied statesmen concerning the rights of 
oppressed peoples and the future of smaller nations. 

The Council consists of twenty-five organizations which are national in scope among 
Americans of Armenian origin. As such it represents — through direct representation in 
the case of these organizations, and tacit approval of its aims in the case of others — 
the overwhelming majority of Americans of Armenian background. 

The Council seeks the interests of the Armenian people who have survived the 
Turkish massacres, deportations and other measures directed at their destruction as 
an ethnic, religious and cultural group. These people have been living as refugee? for 
thirty or more years in the Near East, the Balkans, western Europe, in India, the Far 
East, the Americas, and in the Soviet Union, 

The Council hopes to realize its objectives through the implementation of the ideals 
of justice, freedom, security, and the right of self determination of peoples. It pursues 
these ends through the action of national and international organs of peace. 

The Council is, therefore, interested in the creation, development, and strengthen- 
ing of national and international organs projected for the settlement of social and 
political problems through legal and judicial means. 

Americans of Armenian background feel they have a special responsibility to speak 
on the ratification of the genocide convention. Armenians were the first victims of 
the practice of genocide in modern times. In addition, their losses within less than 
thirty years (1894 to 1922) totalled two million lives, billions in property, and the 
annihilation of a culture in the Armenian provinces in Turkey which went back to 
several thousand years. 

When one considers that out of an Armenian population of more than two and a 
half million in 1882 in Turkey and Turkish Armenia there are left today only eighty 
thousand; that out of a territory of 136,289 square miles constituting the Armenian 
homeland only 11,580 is included in the Armenian Soviet Republic, while the rest 
remains in Turkey, mostly depopulated and in a state of ruin; and that Armenian 
culture has been one of the most fruitful in history that has survived to our age: one real- 
izes the appalling magnitude and depth of the Armenian tragedy. 

There are many Armenians in the United States today as in other countries where 
they have found refuge, who have not a single surviving relative in the whole world — 
no parents, no brothers or sisters, no uncles, or cousins, or nephews, or nieces — not even 
on the secondary or more distant levels. They are completely devoid of any family 
ties, save what relations they have been able to establish with in-laws through marriage. 
As such their experience represents only one of many aspects of the emptiness which 
has entered the life of Armenians who have survived the massacres of World War I. 

The Turkish massacres, deportations, and other types of persecution, such as the 
Imposition of the arbitrary tax on wealth, known as "Varlik Vergisi," which was de- 
vised during World War II in order to destroy not only the Armenian, but also the 
Greek and Jewish minorities in Turkey, constitute a clear cut case of genocide, a 
planned move to destroy religious and ethnic groups. The Turks tried to represent 
these deeds, though futilely, as action against enemies in war or rebels against the 
government. The elimination of the Armenians was resolved on as a step toward 
realizing a pan-Turanian empire across central Asia. The Turks, who represent them- 
selves as a kind of Asiatic "Herrenvolk," set out deliberately to wipe out as a "lesser 
breed without the law" their non-Turkish subjects, who were incontestably their superiors 
morally, socially and culturally. 

The Turks are clearly guilty of four out of the five acts enumerated by the Con- 
vention, the commission of which is defined as constituting genocide. These acts are: 
first, killing members of the group; second, causing them serious bodily or mental 
harm; third, deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about their 
physical destruction; fourth, taking measures to prevent births within the group; and 
fifth, forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. It was only the 
fourth of these acts which the Turks did not engage in, in the sense in which the Nazis 
did, but this was due to their lack of adequate scientific knowledge. They are, however, 
guilty even of this crime in a general way, since by impressing Armenian women into 
Turkish homes and harems they prevented them from bearing Armenian children. The 



unqualified destruction of the men and the frequent sparing of young girls and women 
of child-bearing age under such circumstances cannot be interpreted otherwise. 

With such a background as this Americans of Armenian origin are impelled by 
blood and conscience, and all that America has taught them in regard to justice, 
democracy, decency and human rights to urge the ratification of the Convention on 
the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. 

The argument that the Convention is not an effective instrument for the preven- 
tion and punishment of genocide is not true. This question was raised even enuring 
the debate before the Sixth (Legal) Committee working for the Convention. The 
crime, it was there pointed out, is usually committed by a state and, therefore, it per- 
mitted no punishment short of war. This is not quite the case, however. While it may 
be true that a state cannot be punished except by war, actually it is individual rulers 
who are responsible for the crime. And men do not remain rulers forever. It is as in- 
dividuals that they are guilty, and it is the Convention which would become their 
nemesis in the event of a change of government, or in the event that they left their 
country. The fact that charges could be preferred would act as a strong deterrent. 

An incontrovertible evidence of this is what Hitler did and said in 1939, just before 
the invasion of Poland, when he sent to the East his Death's Head units, with the 
order to "kill without pity or mercy, old men, women and children of the Polish race 
and language," because, he explained, "only in such a way will we win the vital space 
we need." He felt sure at the time he would not be called personally accountable for 
this heinous order, for, he argued, "who still talks nowadays of the extermination of the 
Armenians?" When informed of the threat of the Allies concerning the personal re- 
sponsibility of public criminals, he put the question cynically, "What Allies? The same 
that threatened against the Turks?" 

Hitler was right. The Turks who had plotted the Armenian genocide were not per- 
sonally called to account for their monstrous deeds, a failure for which the world paid 
very dearly. 

On June 23, 1915, the Allies, in the most terrible days of the deportations and mas- 
sacres in Turkey and Armenia, declared to the v/orld that they would hold personally 
responsible and punish as common criminals the authors of these atrocities. The covenant 
of the League of Nations later reaffirmed the principles of human rights, freedom and 
justice, on which such punishment was predicated. And so during the first days of the 
Armistice the Allies arrested the authors of this hitherto unparalleled crime of modern 
times. Eighty-two of the chief accomplices of the Ittihad party were exiled to the island 
of Malta. 

There was a lack of sincerity in the whole procedure from the very beginning evident 
to the keen observer, however. When therefore the United States turned down the 
proposal for a mandate over Armenia, the occasion was used as a ruse to hide the 
ambitions and intrigues of the Allies among themselves in their effort to be the chief 
beneficiaries of the spoils of the war, and the criminals were freed without trial and 
punishment so that they could go back and organize a new Turkey out of the ruins of 
the war. It is not surprising that the Turks themselves were astonished at this manifesta- 
tion of a cynicism, more brazen than any of which they had been accused. They were 
quick, however, to exploit to the hilt this moral faux pas of the Allies. In fact they were 
very much helped in this by the Allies themselves, as each vied with the other to curry 
the favor of the prostrate foe. 

The unpunished criminals set at large and those who scurried out of hiding, as 
well as other less conspicuous offenders, did not lose time in getting together and re- 
viving the old spirit under new names. Many of the old institutions were streamlined 
to correspond to the political forms of the west. Under the "protective" guns of British 
battleships anchored in Constantinople they adopted the National Covenant by which 
they relmquished or acquiesced to the loss of Syria, Palestine and Mesopotamia to the 
British and French, their "liberators," but vowed to regain and remain in possession by 
force of arms the remaining territories, which meant nothing else but the major portion 
of Armenia and all of Greek Anatolia and Kurdistan. 

_ Among the criminals who played an important part in the subsequent post-war 
betrayal of Armenia was Ismet Pasha, now known as Ismet Inonu, since 1938 the presi- 
dent of the "new" Turkey. Ismet Bey, as he was earlier called was a member of the 
ruling Ittihad party, and as captain of the ofiicial staff of the second division of the 
Turkish Army had taken part in the Congress of Edirne of 1914. which made the 
fateful decision concerning the extermination of the Armenian people. It was later as 



Ismet Pasha that he scuttled the Armenian question at the Lausanne Conference in 
the early 'twenties; and still later as Ismet Inonu that he had the remains of Talaat 
Pasha, Turkish premier in World War I and one of the two men most responsible for 
the Armenian massacres, brought back to Turkey from Germany in state. Talaat, who 
had been officially recognized by a German Court at the end of World War I as a 
public criminal, at the trial of his assassin who was set free without prejudice, was form- 
ally declared a hero of the "new" Turkey by this president of the Turkish Republic. 

Others who took part in the Congress of Edirne were Teoof Bey and Fethi Bey, both 
of whom served as prime ministers under the new Kemalist regime; Yousuf Kemal Bev, 
Bekir Sami Bey, and Tushdi Aras Bey, all of whom served as ministers for foreign 
affairs under Kemal; and men like Saracoglu and Menemencioglu, whose terroristic 
activities against the Armenians have been characterized as surpassing anything to be 
found in the annals of Jengiz Khan and the invading Mongols. 

It was under these men led by Mustafa Kemal that, between the Armistice of 
Mudros, October 30, 1918, and the Treaty of Lausanne, July 23, 1923, another one hundred 
thousand Armenians were slain in the Caucasus, western Anatolia, Syria and Cilicia. 

These men also tried to dispose of the large minority of Greeks in Anatolia through 
massacre, deportation, and population exchange. Several years later the deadly wrath 
of these men was poured on the Kurds, their co-religionists, at which time, according 
to some authorities, as many as one million perished. This number may include the 
destruction of the Christian Ass3Tians and of other smaller minority groups in eastern 
Anatolia. Meanwhile the Turkish policy of genocide has continued to date in the form 
of what 'may be referred to as a white massacre, an enforced assimilation of all the 
remaining minorities in Turkey. The result is that Turkey today, according to a public 
declaration of one of its officials, has the smallest "minorities" population in all of 

Obviously the Turkish crime of genocide against the Armenians inflicted a serious 
blow to world civilization, economically, politically, culturally and spiritually, because 
of the unsteady conscience and irresolute will of men and nations during the years 
which followed the first World War, who vascillated endlessly between the desire to 
implement law and order in international relations, on the one hand, and the urge to 
pursue imperialist interests through power politics, on the other hand. 

•^iJ^i'Jl*^ history be allowed to repeat itself by a second less justifiable failure to 
punish the criminals of past genocides and to establish the necessary instruments that 
may prevent the commission of the same crime against other peoples in the future? 
ine ratification of the Convention by the United States will go far In strengthening 
me lorces which are attempting to deal with this problem effectively. 


The holocaust of the second World War once more awakened the conscience of 
organized society and set the stage for the further development of an international legal 
and judicial morality. All who took part in the struggle against the Axis promised that 
war criminals who violated generally accepted international law and committed crimes 
against civilian populations would meet stern punishment. 

As early as 1943 the heads of the governments of the United States, the Soviet Union 
and Great Britain proclaimed in their declaration that those guilty of such crimes 
would be hunted to the ends of the earth and brought to justice. 

When the United Nations was first organized at San Francisco in 1945, it incor- 
porated in its Charter the provisions making respect for personality and protection of 
human rights, irrespective of race, language, religion or sex, a special province of tlie 
new organization, and provided for the creation of the Commission on Human Rights. 

On October 1, 1946, with the sentences handed down in Nuremberg the interna- 
tional community took action for the first time in history to punish men who had 
committed "crimes against humanity," thus recognizing that such crimes were of inter- 
national concern. 

The United States also recognized the event as of epochal significance, when its 
official representative, Mr. Justice Jackson declared that the Nuremberg trials found 
this country and her allies "at one of those rare moments when the thought and in- 
stitutions and habits of the world have been shaken by the impact of world war on the 
habits of countless millions. Such occasions rarely come and quickly pass. We are put 
under a heavy responsibility to see that our behavior during this unsettled period will 
direct the world's thought toward a firmer enforcement of the laws, of international 



conduct, so as to make war less attractive to those who have governments and the 
destinies of the peoples in their power." 

Shortly after the Nuremberg sentences the United Nations took a distinct official 
step with respect to genocide. On December 11, 1946, the General Assembly adopted a 
resolution declaring that the "denial of the right of existence of entire human groups 
shocks the conscience of mankind . . . and is contrary to moral law and the spirit and 
aims of the United Nations;" and that the "punishment of the crime of genocide is a 
matter of international concern." Genocide, it held, "is a crime under international 
law which the civilized world condemns, and for the commission of which principals 
and accomplices — whether private individuals, public officials, or statesmen, and whether 
the crime is committed on religious, racial, political or any other grounds — are punish- 
able." The resolution further recommended international cooperation to facilitate the 
prevention of genocide and punishments for its perpetrators, assigning to the Economic 
and Social Council the task of drawing up a draft agreement on the subject. 

The terms of this resolution were embodied in the Convention on the Prevention 
and Punishment of Genocide which, as Your Honors know, was passed by the General 
Assembly on December 9, 1948 by a vote of 55 to with no abstentions. As such the 
Genocide Convention represents the consensus of the international community. 

The Convention on Gencoide is one of the first efforts of the international com- 
munity to develop principles set forth during the Nuremberg proceedings as a perma- 
nent part of the law of nations; with this difference that whereas the decisions made 
at the Nuremberg trials refer only to war-time acts, the convention extends genocide 
as a crime in peacetime, and thus places on a more universal foundation the interna- 
tional structures against mass murder against national, ethnic and religious groups. 

Such being the case, the ratification of the Convention would enhance the moral 
leadership of the United States in international relations. It has already been so argued 
before this sub-committee on January 23 of this year by Deputy Undersecretary of State 
Rusk, who argued on behalf of the State Department the ratification already endorsed 
by President Truman. "The Senate of the United States," he said, "by giving its advice 
and consent to the ratification of the Convention, will demonstrate to the rest of the 
world that the United States is determined to maintain its moral leadership in interna- 
tional affairs and to participate in the development of international law on the basis 
of human justice." 


We have already discussed the question of the effectiveness of the Convention from 
the negative standpoint of the serious consequences in the absence of such an inter- 
national instrument. Since one of the major attacks on the Convention has been the 
argument that it is not an effective instrument for the prevention and punishment of 
genocide, may we direct your attention to those specific measures in it which discredit 
that argument. 

The Convention as it stands today will be a deterrent to would-be criminals of 
genocide, since it attempts to provide for the punishment of those who would violate 
this most basic of human rights, namely, the right of peoples to live. 

The Convention makes it clear that persons committing any of the acts which go 
under the official definition of genocide will be punished "whether they are constitu- 
tionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals," and that they will be 
tried by some competent tribunal of the territory in which the act was committed, or 
alternatively by an international penal tribunal. By specifying that genocide is an 
extraditable offense, the convention guarantees that no criminal committing genocide 
will be able to obtain asylum in any country of the signatories. 

Henceforth it will not be possible for people guilty of the crime of genocide to be 
at large, without the apprehension that the organized will and judicial machinery of 
international society has condemned them as public criminals subject to punishment 
in due time. 

The Convention binds the contracting states to pass the necessary legislation to give 
effect to its provisions, especially to provide effective penalties. It obligates these states 
to try persons charged with offences in their competent national court. Furthermore 
the states agree that the acts listed shall not be considered political crimes, and pledge 
to grant extradition in accordance with their laws and treaties. 

In addition to such national action, the Convention also envisages trial by an. 
International penal tribunal should one be set up and should the contracting parties 



accept its jurisdiction. Furthermore it provides that any of the contracting parties may 
bring a charge of genocide, or of the other acts, before the competent organs of the 
United Nations and ask for appropriate action according to the Charter. 

If there is any dispute between one country and another on the interpretation, 
application, or fulfillment of the Convention the dispute must be submitted to the 
International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute. 

Many UN delegations have been ready and eager to implement those provisions 
of the Convention that relate to international jurisdiction at an early date. Wahid 
Fikry Raafat of Egypt, in his comments on the occasion of the passage of the Conven- 
tion, referred to this clearly when he said: "We continue to fesl with a number of other 
delegates that, in order that punishment of genocide may be effected, it is necessary 
for the most dangerous culprit to be convinced beforehand that, even if he could escape 
the judgment of a national court, he cannot escape the judgment of an international 
tribunal which will be impartial." 

While the Convention will be binding only upon those states which have accepted it, 
nevertheless by establishing an international standard and by recognizing the principle 
of international responsibility, its jurisdiction may ultimately extend beyond that of the 
nations which ratified it. 

The ratification of the Convention by all governments and the eventual development 
of an international judiciary to deal effectively with the practice of genocide will also 
remove the possibility of the political exploitation of this crime by individual states or 
a special grouping of states to serve their nationalistic or imperialistic interests, at the 
expense of the ultimate breakdown of international law and the peace of the world. 

Dr. Herbert V. Evatt, the president of the UN General Assembly at which the 
convention outlawing genocide was adopted, told the Assembly that while endeavors 
occasionally had been made in past centuries "to preserve human groups from destruc- 
tion through so-called humanitarian interventions undertaken by one nation acting 
usually alone," these took the form of diplomatic action, which frequently opened the 
governments who undertook the interventions to charges "of pursuing other than 
humanitarian aims." "Today," he added, "we are establishing international collective 
safeguards for the very existence of such human groups. Whoever will act in the name 
of the United Nations will do it on behalf of universal conscience as embodied in this 
great organization. The intervention of the United Nations and other organs which 
will have to supervise application of the Genocide Convetion will be made according 
to international law and not according to unilateral political considerations. In this 
field, which relates to the sacred right of existence of human groups, we are proclaiming 
today the supremacy of international law once and, I hope, forever." 

Another serious opposition to the ratification of the Convention by the United 
States has risen from lawyers who are fearful that the treaty would invade the rights 
of individual states of the United States and may open the way to international jursidic- 
tion over the United States. We maintain that contrary to this apprehension the in- 
terests of the United States both at home and abroad will not be jeopardized but actually 

It seems hard to believe i that any document with such highly laudable purposes 
should encounter any opposition in a country like the United States, where there have 
never been any incidents of genocide (excepting perhaps in the cases of the American 
Indian and of some of the worst abuses of the slaves before the Civil War). The 
misgivings have come from no less a body than the American Bar Association. Oddly 
enough, members of the Bar Association seem in their objections to have very little 
confidence in the judicial and political system of which they are such important main- 
stays. They insist that the imperfection they find in the treaty can be dealt with only 
by revisions or Senatorial reservations (which would, in the eyes of the world, weaken 
the United States' position regarding genocide), and seem unable to recognize that the 
diflBculties they foresee can be resolved (if, indeed, they ever arise) equally well by the 
Congress and courts of the United States. 

IThis and the following paragraphs in this section are taken from a study of Dr. Richard N. 
Swift, Instructor in Government and Assistant to the Director of the Graduate Program of 
Studies in the United Nations and World Affairs, at New York University. Dr. Swift is also 
Liaison Officer of New York University to the UN. The study appeared in The Standard, 
organ of the American Ethical Union, February 1950, pp. 208-215, and is entitled "The 
International Murder Case." 



The Association, for instance, would, insist on a reservation making it specific that 
"killing members of a group" applied to the killing of thousands of people and not just a 
few. Here the Association would appear to be more guilty than the United Nations 
of the poor draftsmanship they imply exists, because obviously more important than the 
numbers involved in genocide is the "intent to destroy." It is perfectly possible that 
997 persons might be victims of the crime, and it seems unduly cruel to bar them the 
protection of the law because three few were killed. The lawyers wish to assure them- 
selves, of course, that the execution by due process of law of a few people would not 
be termed genocide just because they were incidentally all members of one group, but 
certainly this involves a question of fact which any court is qualified to determine. 

Similarly there was objection to the use of the phrase "mental harm" in Article 
II because it might open the way to unnecessary litigation based on evidence of psycho- 
logical injuries rather than mental harm arising from the use of narcotic drugs. Here 
again, it seems diflScult to understand why the courts are not competent to interpret 
this Article. It is, in fact, clear from the context of the debates on the phraseology, 
that it is to the use of narcotic drugs (as they were employed, for instance, by the 
Japanese in China) that these words pertain. In interpreting this Article, any court 
would seek out the intent of the United Nations, just as the Supreme Court, in interpret- 
ing American law, seeks out the intent of Congress. 

The Association felt that prohibitions against direct and public incitement to commit 
genocide would be without force in the United States. On the contrary, if the United 
States ratified the treaty, it would become the supreme law of the land according to 
our Constitution, and as such, these prohibitions would apply here. What is more, it 
seems clear that this clause would be interpreted like other limitations upon freedom 
of speech, for instance by the "clear and present danger" test set forth In Schenk v. 
United States. The Association also asked for a definition of "complicity" in genocide, 
a task which might equally well be left to future judicial determination. 

More serious than these legal quibbles was a request by the Association that the 
Senate specifically state that the operative Articles of the Covenant are not self- 
executing in the United States, because their entrance into force would depend upon 
action in the field of civil rights by the individual American states. If this were a 
thoroughly established constitutional principle in this country, it would seem unneces- 
sary to state it in a reservation, but actually, the United States can make treaties in 
areas usually thought to be within the province of the states if the subject matter of 
the treaty has attained sufficiently an international aspect. The Bar Association's 
request would seem, therefore, to be directed at securing a political judgment in this 
case which would negate the effect of the Convention. Southern Senators might well 
insist on such a reservation on general principles, inasmuch as they are reluctant for 
obvious reasons to see further inroads made by the federal government in the civil 
rights domain. That like motivations are behind the Association's recommendation 
seems obvious from other "objections" to the Convention raised in the course of dis- 
cussion — objections that the Convention would end by removing from the states all 
jurisdiction over civil rights; that each death in a race riot would become an inter- 
national crime; and that the United States might find itself having to protect minorities 
everywhere if it ratified this Convention. 

Actually, all of these statements are either untrue or irrelevant. The relation be- 
tween the states and the federal government in the field of civil rights has been con- 
stantly changing, and it will be up to the Supreme Court when specific cases arising 
under the Covenant are brought before it, to decide what effect the Convention will 
have. No death in a race riot would be an international crime (although perhaps it 
should be) unless it was part of a deliberate attempt to destroy the race. Furthermore, 
the United States will find its relations to foreign minorities uneffected by this treaty. 
If the treatment of minorities becomes a matter of concern to the General Assembly, 
it becomes automatically a matter of concern to the United States in any case, whether 
we have ratified the treaty or not, and in fact, we have already concerned ourselves 
with the treatment of minorities in certain Balkan countries. 

Because of the objections it raised, the Bar Association urges the U. S. not to 
ratify the Convention until the Constitutional questions involved have been resolved, 
No one except the Supreme Court can resolve these questions, however, and the Court 
cannot act until cases are brought before it under the Convention. No ratification, 
therefore no cases; so waiting to ratify until th constitutional questions are resolvved 
is equivalent to waiting an indeterminate length of time for an impossible event. 
Actually, it Is more sound to ratify and leave it to the courts and Congress to harmonize 
the meaning of the treaty with our domestic laws, if, as, and when any cases do arise. 



Beneath the surface of the objections raised against the Convention seem to be fears 
that the agencies of international organization might some day hand down a decision 
which certain portions of opinion in the United States would oppose. As a matter of 
fact, in the case of this Convention that is most unlikely. Many of the h37pothetical 
cases cited by the treaty's opponents are false issues or are based on misconceptions 
of the international law involved, and there is no likelihood that the United States will 
ever find itself embarrassed because of having ratified. 

The critics of the Convention, however, are either unaware of or indifferent towards 
an important ethical issue involved in their position. This is the question of the kind 
of morality involved in the implicit assumpton that in specific cases the international 
community must constantly agree with American conceptions of what is just. Nowhere 
is there an admission that the United States might ever be mistaken; nowhere any 
indication of a willingness to submit to any judicial procedures where we are not In 
complete command; nowhere, certainly, (and unfortunately), any glimmer of a realiza- 
tion that if we are ever to have world peace, we should without a dpubt be prepared 
to submit to international legal procedures established and agreed to in advance 
without knowing what the outcome in specific instances will be; and nowhere any idea 
that we should be willing to change our laws, if necessary, to harmonize with the will 
of the international community. 

To accept such a point of view may perhaps require more ethical growth in the 
United States, but this development is certainly not a prerequisite for ratification of 
the Convention on Genocide. It should be enough to realize that ratification would 
put the United States squarely on the side of those interested in increasing the stature 
of international law in the community of nations by making it apply to crimes that are 
truly international and to individuals and governments (who can be tried) and not 
merely to nation-states (which are impersonal legal fictions). As democratic leaders in 
the world, we have the greatest responsibility to ratify the Convention. It was the 
United States which at Nuremberg placed itself wholly in favor of the development of 
international law by these methods, and it behooves us now, both in our own interest, 
and in the interest of the community of nations, not to reverse ourselves. 

Reservations can only complicate the understanding of other nations with regard 
to our position on this issue and the international legal situation with regard to genocide. 
Since our normal constitutional procedures are adequate to deal with the questions 
raised by the opponents of the Convention, it seems sheer folly to equivocate about our 
firm opposition to organized mass murder. 


The ratification of the Covenant by the United States and other countries would 
strengthen the forces which make for law and order in human relations, both on the 
intra-national and international levels. As Mr. M. K. V. K. Sundaram of India has 
pointed out: "A convention of this character would be an effective instrument only to 
the extent that there is real and wholehearted support from a large number of sovereign 
states. It would be an easy task to draw up an ideal convention on paper, completely 
acceptable from one point of view, but such a convention would be worthless if it did 
not commend itself to many states." 

The question of whether or not to ratify the Convention is not one of making just 
a decision on another treaty, but one of commitment on the more vital question 
whether man is willing and capable to develop international law by legislative tech- 
niques. A positive yes will strengthen the United States and the cause of international 
government in the years ahead, for methods used in developing international law in 
relation to genocide later undoubtedly will be applied to other fields. A negative answer 
win leave no alternative but further submission to the vicious cycle of destructive wars. 
It will add to those subversive forces in the world which would stifie the enlightened 
moral conscience of humanity. 

Armenians, one of the peoples hardest hit from the failure to fulfill the principles 
of human rights, justice and freedom enunciated by the Allied diplomats during the 
first World War, know what it will mean to the world if more drastic action is not taken 
in the present post-war era than was the case in the 'twenties and 'thirties to check 
the murderous inclinations of those who may launch genocide against other peoples 
in the future. 

It is the earnest desire of the Armenian National Council of America that the United 
States, wtih its traditional regard for law and human rights, should promptly ratify 
the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. 



JjEGINNING with this issue of Armenian Affairs an attempt will be made to pub- 
lish in these pages inclusive bibliographies on various subjects in the Armenian field. 
The bibliography which appeared in the last issue consisted mainly of annotated 
references to current books and articles. Only those references will be included in the 
new lists for which it has been possible to obtain adequate bibliographical informa- 
tion by the time of publication. 

The new lists will be taken from an extensive manuscript collection on which 
the editor of this journal has been working for years. That work was recently aug- 
mented by an additional collection of references (constituting about one-fifth of the 
entire collection) contributed by Miss Nouvart Tashjian, Chief of the Catalogue 
Department of Washington Square College, New York University, for which grate- 
ful acknowledgment is made here. The additional material consists mainly of refer- 
ences to older works. 

The combined collection is undoubtedly the most extensive, accurate, and 
"precisely" classified reference work of its kind outside of Soviet Armenia. It is 
so organized as to suggest possible areas for research and study to those who wish 
to explore and write in the Armenian field. The following outline of one of the 
main divisions of the bibliography constitutes the headings under which are filed 
the references pertaining to the respective subjects. That, together with the refer- 
ences which follow, indicates the extent to which thoroughness has been attained in 
the preparation of the new bibliography. The same subjects will be brought up to 
date from time to time, when older references — left out from the present list due 
to insufficient bibliographical data — will be included. 

The Armenian Question 

I. The Armenian Question — general discussion and histoiy 
II. The Armenian Question and the West up to World War I — general discussion 

and history 
III. The Armenian Question by Countries — to date 

1. Armenia and the Armenians (mainly up to the first World War) 

2. Britain (to be further subdivided) 

3. Denmark 

4. France 

5. Germany and Austria-Hungary 

6. Greece 

7. Holland 

8. India 

9. Italy 

10. Kurds and Kurdistan 

11. Lebanon 

12. Poland 

13. Russia 

14. The Soviet Union 

15. Switzerland 

10. Tvirkey — general discussion and history 

a. Prior to 1908 

b. From 1908 to 1913 

c. After 1918 

d. Atrocities — general discussion and history 

(1) Before 1894 

(2) From 1894 to 1908 



(3) In CUicia in 1909 

(4) From 1914 to 1918 

(5) After 1918— under Kemalist Tiirkey 

(6) During World War II and After. 1939- 

e. Genocide and Histocide 

f. Pan-Turanism 

17. The united States (to be further subdivided) 

18. Yugoslavia 

IV. The Armenian Question by Special Subjects— to date 

1. The Church 

2. Missions 

3. Repatriation 

4. The Territorial Issue 

V. The Armenian Question During World War I and After— general discussion and 

1. Armenia and the Armenians (mainly Turkish Armenia) 

2. Transcaucasia and the Armenian Republic of 1918-1920 

3. The West, 1914-1926 

a. Brest-Litovsk 

b. The Peace Conference 

c. Sevres 

d. Kars— 1920 and 1921 

e. Lausanne 

f. The League of Nations 

4. Cilicia 

5. After Lausanne, 1927-1939 

VI. The Armenian Question During World War II and After 
(Chronologically arranged) 

The Armenian Question— General Discussion 

And History 

Asian, Kevork. Armenia and the Armenians from the Earliest Times Until the Great War 
1914). Translated from the French by Pierre Crabites ; with a preface on the Evolu- 
tion of the Armenian Question by the translator. New York, The Macmilllan Co., 1920. 
xxix, 138 p.. This is a translation of the author's £tudes Historigues sur le Peuple 

Basmadijian, K. J. Histoire Moderne des Armeniens, Depuis la chute du royaume jusqu'd 
Traits de Sevres (1375-1920). Les guerres Russo-Turques, les guerres Russo-Persanes, 
les guerres Perso-Turques, les soulevements des Armeniens, la question Armenienne. 
Preface par J. de Morgan. Nouvelle edition revue et augmentee. Paris, J. Gamber, 
1922. X, 240 p. The earlier edition brought the subject up to 1916 and was published 
in 1917, same place, same publisher, viii, 174 p. 

Bryce, James, viscount. Transcaucasia and Ararat. Being notes of a vacation tour in 
the autumn of 1876. Fourth edition revised, with a supplementary chapter on the re- 
cent history of the Armenian question. London, Macmillan and Co., Ltd. ; New York, 
The Macmillan Co., 1896, xix, 526 p. The first edition was published in 1877. 

Cahuet, Alberic. La Question d'Orient dans I'Histoire Contemporaine, 1821-1905. Preface 
de M. Frederic Passy. Paris, 1905. iii, 537 pp. 

Curzon, Robert, Baron de la Zouche. Armenia: A Year at Erzeroom, and on the Frontiers of 
Russia, Turkey, and Persia. Third edition. London, 1854. A later edition appeared in 
London in 1911. 

Dillon, Emile Joseph. "The Condition of Armenia." Contemporary Review, London, 1895, 
LXVII, 153-189. 

Driault, Edouard. La Question d'Orient. Depuis ses origins jusqu'a nos jours. Preface de 
M. Gabriel Monod. 5. ed. rev. et cor. Ouvrage recompense par I'lnstitut. Paris, F. 
Alcan, 1912, xv, 407 p. Bibliotheque d'Histoire Contemporaine. 6. ed. mise au courant 
des demiers evenements. Paris, Alcan, 1914, xv, 411. 7 ed mise au courant des derniers 
ev6nements (1916). Paris, F. Alcan, 1917, xv, 432 p. 8. ed. entierement refondue. Paris, 
F. Alcan, 1921. xv, 470 p. 



Driaiilt, Edouard. La Reprise d'Orient, 1918-1937. La paix de la Mediterrande. Paris, F. 

Alcan, 1938. xvi, 538 p. lUus, maps. Bibliotheque d'Histoire Contemporaine. 
Driault, Edouard. La Reprise de Constantinople et V Alliance Franco-Russe. Paxis, F. Alcan, 

1915. 48 p. "Cette etude a paru dans la Revue des Etudes Napoleoniennes, Mai-Juin 

1915." Includes discussion on the Orient after the Turkish invasion, and the crisis from 

Filian, George H. Armenia and Her People: or. The Story of Armenia by an Armenian. 

Hartford, Conn., American Publishing Co., 1896. xx, 21-376 p. lUus., map. 
Gabrielian, Mugurdich Ghojhauji. Armenia, a Martyr Nation. A historical sketch of the 

Armenian people from traditional times to the present tragic days. New York, Chicago 

[etc.] Fleming H. Revell [cl918]. 352 p. Map. 
GauUs, Georges. Les Questions d'Orient. Paris, Librarie de "Pages Libres," 1905. 126 p. 

Etudes sur la Politique Exterieure des Etats. No. 3. Bibliography, pp. 125-126. 
Gianini, Amedeo. L'Ultima Fase della Questione Orientale (1913-1932). Roma, Institute 

per rOriente, 1933. 7-416 p. Maps. Bibliography, pp. 9-10. 
Hepworth, George Hughes. Through Armenia on Horseback. New York, E. P. Dutton and 

Company, 1898. xii, 355 p. Map. 
The Land of Ararat: or. Up the Roof of the World. By a special correspondent. London, 

Eden, 1893. 348 p. Illus., map. 
L6art, Marcel. La Question Armenienne a la Lumiere des Documents. Paris, A. Challamel, 

1913. 76 p. Map. 
MacCoU, Malcolm. Memoirs and Correspondence. Edited by George W. E. Russell. London, 

Smith, Elder and Co., 1914. 407 p. Chapter on Armenia, pp. 139-214. 
Macler, Frederic. "Comment a Vecu I'Armenie Depuis 1896." La Vie, January 1, 1920, p. 7. 
Macler, Frederic. La Nation Armdnienne. Son passe, ses malheurs. Avec une carte dessinee 

par Raphael Chichmanian. Paris, Fischbacher, 1924. 110 p. 
Moyne, Walter Edward Guinness. Impressions of Armenia. London, The Armenian Bureau, 

1918. See also the National Review, l^ondon, 1914, LXLII, 789-801. 
Ramsay, Sir William Mitchell. Impressions of Turkey during Twelve Tears' Wanderings. 

New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons; London, Hodder and Stoughton, 1897. xvi, 296 p. 
Rohrbach, Carl Albert Paul. "A Contribution to the Armenian Question." Forum, New York, 

1909, XXIX, 481-492. 
Sarkissian, Arshag Ohan. History of the Armenian Question to 1885. Urbana, The University 

of Illinois Press, 1938. 151 p. Illinois Studies in the Social Sciences, vol. XXII, nos. 3-4. 

University of lUinois Bulletin, vol. XXXV, no. 80. The first six chapters were submitted 

as thesis at the University of Illinois in 1934, of which there is a published abstract, 

Urbana, 111., 1934. 8 p. 
[Terhune, Mrs. Mary Virginia (Hawes).] Home of the Bible. A Woman's Vision of the 

Bible Land. ... By Marion Harland [pseud.] [With] The Thrilling Story of Armenia. 

. . . by G. H. Sandison. Philadelphia, Historical Pub. Co., [c.l896]. 446 p. Illus. 
Thoumaian, G. Patmutiun Arevelian Khendro yev Aratchnord Haikakan Hartsi [History of 

the Eastern Problem and Guide to the Armenian Question]. London, 1905. 368 p. 
Tupper, Henry Allen. Armenia: Its Present Crisis and Past History. Baltimore, New York, 

J. Murphy and Company, 1896. 182 p. 
Varandian, Mikael. L'Arminie et la Question Armenienne. Avec une preface de Victor 

Berard. Laval, Impr. Moderne, G. Kavanagh et Cie., [pref. 1917]. 115 p. Published 

under the auspices of the Armenian Delegation at the Paris Conference, 1919. 
Vertanes, Charles Aznakian. Armenia Reborn [New York], Armenian National Council of 

America, [1947]. xxii, 216 p. Illus. map. Bibliography, pp. 180-195. 
Vogel, Charles and Coumryantz, A. Le Peuple qui Souffre. L'Armenie, ses origine, son 

passe, son avenir? Preface par Jean Jullien. Paris, Dorbon Aine, [1917]. xiii, 15-110 p. 
Williams, William Llewelyn. Armenia: Past and Present. A study and a forecast. With an 

introduction by T. P. O'Connor, M.P. London, P. S. King and Son, Ltd., 1916. xi, 

211 p. 
Wintle, W. J. Armenia and its Sorrows. 2d ed., with an additional chapter, bringing the 

record down to September 1896. London, A. Melrose, [pref. 1896]. 120 p. lUus., map. 

The Armenian Question and the West — Up to 

World War I 

General Discussion and History 
(See also under "The Armenian Question by Countries.") 
Akunian, Use (Levien). [Use Frapan-Akunian, pseud.] Die Armenische Frage und das 
Europdiiche Gewissen. Genf, 1903. 32 p. 



Apcar, Diana Agabeg. Betrayed Armenia. Yokohama, Japan Gazette Press, 1910. 77 p. 

Apcar, Diana Agabeg. In His Name. Yokohama, Japan Gazette Press, 1911. 5-52 p. 

Apcar, Diana Agabeg. The Peace of Europe. N. p., [1913]. 2-6 p. 

Apcar, Diana Agabeg. Peace and No Peace. Yokohama, Japan Gazette Press, 1912. 101 p. 

Apcar, Diana Agabeg. The Peace Problem. Yokohama, Japan Gazette Press, 1912. 131 p. 

Apcar, Seth A. MSmoire sur la Situation Actuelle des Armeniens et sur leur Avenir, etc 
London, 1876. 12 p. . . , 

Arakelian, H. La Question Armenienne au Point de Vue de la Paix Untverselle. Rapport au 
Congres sur I'etat actuel des Armeniens en Turquie. Geneve, 1901. 63 p. 

Argyll (Eighth Duke of), George Douglas Campbell. The Eastern Question from the Treaty 
of Paris 1856 to the Treaty of Berlin 1878, and to the Second Afghan War. London, 
Strahan and Co., [1879]. 2 vols. 

Bierstadt, Edward Hale. The Great Betrayal. A survey of the Near East problem. Foreword 
by Edward Capps. London, Hutchinson and Co., 1924. 345 p. Maps. Also published in 
New York, R. M. McBride, 1924. 345 p. 

Charmetant, Felix. L'ArmSnie Agonisante et I'Europe Chretienne. Appel aux chefs d'etat. 
Paris, Bureau des Ouvres d'Orient, 1897. 32 p. 

Gabriel, M. S. Christian Armenia and the Christian Powers. An address to American churches. 
New York, 1897. 32 p. 

Gregory, Daniel Seely. "The Armenian Crisis in the Eastern Question. The Armenian 
crisis and massacres." In his The Crime of Christendom: or. The Eastern Question. 
From its origin to the present time. New York, The Abbey Press, [cop. 1900]. vi, 330 p. 

Holland, Sir Thomas Erskine. The European Concert in the Eastern Question. A collection 
of treaties and other public acts, ed. with introduction and notes by Thomas Erskine 
Holland. Oxford, The Clarendon Press, 1885. xii, 366 p. 

International Conference on the Situation in the Near East, London, 1904. Report of the 
International Conference on the Situation in the Near East, Held in London 29th June, 
1904. [Lodon, Alexander and Shepherd, Ltd.], 1904. 64 p. Included, in addition to 
the report, preface by James Bryce and F. S. Stevenson ; note on the English move- 
ment, by H. W. Massingham ; note on the historical background, by H. N. Brailsford ; 
and a brief account on the then recent massacres, by G. R. Malloch. The conference 
was held under the auspices of the International Eastern Question Association. 

Laurent, J. "Les Origines Medievales de la Question Armenienne." Revue des Etudes Arini- 
niennes, Paris, 1920, I, 35-54. 

Lepsius, Johannes. Armenien und Europa. Eine anklageschrift wider die Christlischen gross- 
mSchte und ein aufruf an das Christlische Deutschland. Berlin. W. Faber, 1896. 245 p. 

Lepsius, Johannes. Armenia and Europe. An Indictment. Ed. by Rendel Harris. London, 
Hodder and Stoughton, 1897. xxii, 331 p. Translated from the German. 

Lynch, Harry Finnis Blosse. "The Armenian Question: Europe or Russia?" Contemporary 
Review, London, 1896, LXIX, 270-276. 

MacColI, Malcolm. The Sultan and the Powers. London, Longmans, Greene and Company, 
1896, xvi, 308 p. The first half of this book is comprised of revised articles contributed to 
the Daily Chronicle during September and October of 1896. There is also a French trans- 
lation of the work: Le Sultan et les Grandes Puissances. Tr. de I'Anglais par Jean 
Longuet, preface d'Urbain Gohier. Paris, F. Alcan, 1899. xvi, 247 p. 

Manifestations Franco-Anglo-Italiennes. Pour VArminie et la Macedoine: MM. M. Berthelot, 
Charmetant, etc. Preface de Victor B6rard, introduction de Pierre Quillard, rapport de 
Francis Pressense. Paris, Societe Nouvelle de Librairie et d'fidition, 1904. vi-xxx, 319 p. 

Medlicott, William Newton. The Congress of Berlin and After. A diplomatic history of the 
Near Eastern settlement, 1878-1880. With three maps. London, Methuen and Company, 
_ Ltd. [1938]. xii, 442 p. Illus. Bibliography, pp. 420-427. 

Quillard, Pierre. Pour I'Armenie. Memoire et dossier, Paris, [1902]. 167 p. Cahiers de la 
Quinzaine, ser. 3, cahier 19. Includes "Docmnents Annexes" and extracts from Pro 
Armenia, pp. 101-162. Bibliography, pp. 4, 163-166. 

Rolin-Jacquemyns, Gustave Henri Ange Hippolyte. Armenia, the Armenians, and the Treaties. 
Tr. from the Revue de Droit International et de Legislation Comparie, Brussels, and 
revised by the author. London, J. Heywood, 1891. xvii, 104 p. 

Schopoff, A. Les RSformes et la Protection des Chretiens en Turquie, 1673-1904. Firmans, 
b6rats, protocoles , . . lois memorandums, etc. Paris, Plon-Nourrit et Cie., 1904. ii. 
645 p. ' ' 

Shupp, Paul Frederick. The European Powers and the Near Eastern Question, 1806-1807. 
New York, Columbia University Press; London, P. S. King and Son, Ltd., 1931. 576 p. 
Columbia University Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, ed. by the facuUy 
of political science of Columbia University, no. 349. Issued also as a Ph.D. thesis of 
Columbia University. Bibliography, pp. 559-565. 



Publications Received 

Khachatur Abovian. Rany Armenii [Wounds of Armenia]. M. Abeghian Literary Institute 
of the Armenian Academy of Sciences. Yerevan-Moscow, Hai-pet-hrat, 1948. 7-321 p. 
American Journal of Archeology, January 1950, vol, LIV, no. 1. 96, [17] p. Published by the 

Archeological Institute of America, Cambridge, Mass. 
Babken Arakelian. Haikakan Patkerakandaknere IV -VII Barer oum [Armenian Reliefs of 
the Fourth to the Seventh Centuries]. Yerevan, Publication of the Armenian Academy 
of Sciences, 1949. 119, [52] p. Institute of the History and Theory of Art of the 
Armenian Academy of Sciences. 
Armenian Guardian, New York. Monthly in English published by the Armenian Church 

Youth Organization of the Diocese of the Armenian Church in North America. 
Armenian Tribune, New York. English weekly for Armenian youth. Published by the Ar- 
menian Youth of America. 
Armenian Mirror-Spectator, New York. English weekly for Armenian youth. Published by 

the Baikar Association, Inc. 
Atanassian, A. Temoignages sur I'Origine des Armeniens. Preface par H. Turabian. Paris, 

Impr. Turabian, 1945. 61 p. 
Baikar [Struggle], Boston. Armenian daily, organ of the Armenian Democratic Liberal Party. 
A. A. Bedikian. Jrag. [Lamp]. Book II. New York, 1948. 186 p. M. M. Chamalian Publica- 
tion Fund, Armenian Evangelical Church of New York. Eleventh to fifteenth combined 
volumes of the "Jrag" periodical leaflet. 
A. Bakikhanov. Sbornik Statei po Istorii Azerbaidzhana [A Collection of Articles on the 
History of Azerbaijan]. Part I. Baku, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Institute of 
History, 1949. 5-312 p. (Russian). 
[British Museum.] Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, etc., in the British Museum. 
Part II. (50 Plates.) Printed by order of the Trustees. London, Oxford University 
Press, 1896. 
Bulletin of the Near East Society, New York, January 1949 to June 1950, Vol. Ill, nos. 

1 to 6. 
Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, vol. XIII, 

part 2, 1950. iii, 265-550 p. 
Chahagir [Torch Bearer]. Monthly organ of the Armenian Evangelical Union of California. 
Gherepnin, L. V. Ruskie Feodalnye Arkhivi XIV-XV Vekov [Russian Feudal Archives of 
the XIV-XV Centuries]. USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of History. Moscow- 
Leningrad, USSR Academy of Sciences, 1948. 472 p. (Russian.) 
Y. A. Cosminsky. Mitchin Dareri Patmoutiun [History of the Middle Ages]. Textbook for 
the sixth and seventh grades of intermediate schools. Authorized by the Ministry of 
Education of the Armenian SSR. Yerevan, Hai-pet-hrat, 1950. 396 p. lUus., maps. 
Institute of History of the Armenian Academy of Sciences. 
Vahram Dadrian. Hing Taterakhagher yev Tservadz Edcher [Five Plays and Scattered 

Pages]. Boston, Haig H. Toumayan Press, 1950. 350 p. $2.00. 
Drvagner Haikakan Teghernen yev Veradzenount [Chapters from the Armenian Tragedy 
and Rebirth]. Report on the 1915 massacres from European, American and Armenian 
sources. Paris, Imprimerie H. Turabian, 1947. 205 p. 
The Eastern Churches Quarterly, Ramsgate, England, Spring 1950, vol. VIII, no. 5. 
Eritassard Hayastan [Young Armenia]. New York. Bi-weekly organ of the S.D. Hunchakian 

Forward Through the Ages. Annual report of the American Board of Commissioners for 
Foreign Missions for the year 1949. Boston, American Board of Commissioners for 
Foreign Missions. 136 p. 
Boghos Gadarigian. Mar adz Djragner {Havav Gugheen Yegherne) [Lights That Have Gone 

Out (The Tragedy of the Village of Havav)]. New York, Gotchnag Press, 1950. 136 p. 
The Genocide Convention. Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign 
Relations, United States Senate, Eighty-first Congress, Second Session on Executive O. 
The International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 
Genocide, January 23, 24, 25 and February 9, 1950. Washington, D. C. United States 
Prmting Office, 1950, v. 555 p. 
Geroicheski Kavkaz [The Heroic Caucasus]. From Opinions of Historians and Annalists 
tn^o* o=^ Heroism of the People of the Caucasus. Institute of History. Baku, Az-Fan. 
iy4J. 35 p. Azerbaijan Affiliate, USSR Academy of Sciences. (Russian.) 
Gotchnag [Church Bell], New York. Independent Armenian weekly. 
Great Britain and the East. London, June and July 1950, vol. LXVI, nos. 1809 and 1810. 



V. A. Grekov. Krestyane Na Rusi [The Peasantry in Russia]. From ancient times to the 
XVII century. Moscow-Leningrad, USSR Academy of Sciences, Institute of History, 
1946. 961 p. (Russian). 

M. Gorki. Terkeri Zhoghovadzou [Collected Works]. Ed, by Simak, Arazi and H. Mekrtichian. 
Vol. V. Yerevan, Hai-pet-hrat, 1950. 598 p. 

Grigor of Akanc. "History of the Nation of the Archers (The Mongols). Hitherto ascribed 
to Maghak'ia the Monk. The Armenian text, edited with an English translation and 
notes by Robert P. Blake and Richard N. Frye." Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 
Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Yenching Institute, December 1949, vol .XII, nos. 3 and 4. 
pp. 269-399. Pages 400-443 consists of an article by Francis Woodman Cleaves, "The 
Mongolian Names and Terms in the History of the Nation of the Archers, by Grigor 
of Akanc'." 

Groong [Crane], Philadelphia. Independent Armenian and English weekly. 

Haikakan SSR Constitutsia [Armenian SSR Constitution]. Syllabus for the Intermediate 
School. Yerevan, Hai-pet-hrat, 1949. 112 p. 

H. Hairapetian and A. Bloozian. Maireni Lezoo. Entertsaran. (The Mother Ton^e. 
Reader). For the first grade. Authorized by the Ministry of Education of the Armenian 
SSR. Yerevan, Hai-pet-hrat, 1950. 122 p. 

Hayastanyaitz Tegeghetzy [The Armenian Church], New York. Official organ, monthly, of the 
Diocese of the Armenian Church in North America. 

Hoosharar [The Prompter], New York. Monthly organ of the Armenian General Benevolent 

International Affairs, London. AprU and July 1950, vol. XXVI, nos. 2 and 3. Quarterly 
published by the Royal Institute of International Affairs. 

Interpretation. A Journal of Bible and Theology, Richmond, Va. April 1950, vol. IV, no. 2. 
131-256 p. 

The Journal of Bible and Religion, April and July 1950, vol. XVIII, nos. 2 and 3. Published 
by the National Association of Biblical Instructors. 

Journal of the Royal Central Asian Society, London, April 1950, vol. XXXVII, part II. 
110-216 p. 

Khronika Muhameda Takhira Al-Karakhi [Chronicles of Mohammed Takhir Al-Karakhi]. 
Institute of Eastern Studies of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Moscow-Leningrad, 
Publication of the USSR Academy of Science, 1946. 21, 311 p. About the Dagestan 
wars in the period of Shamil. 

Levon Kazanjian. Veradzenount Van-Vaspurakani [Renaissance of Van-Vaspurakan]. Cul- 
tural Golden Age (1850-1950). Boston, Toumayan Brothers, 1950. 325 p. 

Lraper [Herald], New York. Armenian tri-weekly, organ of the Armenian Progressive League 
of America. 

Colonel Robert R. McCormick. Turkey. An address, March 25, 1950, broadcast over WGN, 
WGNB and the Mutual Broadcasting System. 5 p. 

Y. A. Manandian. Kratki Obzor Istorii Drevnei Armenii [A Short Survey of the History of 
Ancient Armenia]. Moscow-Leningrad, Publication of the USSR Academy of Sciences, 
1943. 55 p. (Russian). 

Bishop Sion Manoogian. Hat Terusaghem [Armenian Jerusalem]. Boston, Baikar Press, 1948. 
175 p. lUus. 

Bishop Sion Manoogian, Khorhourt Vardanants [Meaning of Vardanants]. Boston, 1946. 62 p. 

Bishop Sion Manoogian. Loosashogh Demker yev Kyank yev Khorhourt [Radiant Personal- 
ities and Life and Mystery]. Boston, Haig H. Toumayan Press, 1949. 163 p. 

Dikran Megount (Dikran Spear). Hisnamyak Hai Yeritsakan Tekeghetsvo [Jubilee of the 
Armenian Presbyterian Church], 1898-1948. Weehauken, N. J. 1950. 64 p. 

Vartan Melkonian. Seventh Heaven. Reflections and Humour. Basra, [Iraq], The Times 
Press, 1947. 25 p. 

Vartan Melkonian. Tour Oriental Polyglossary. Beirut, Lebanon, The Press of Loussartsag, 
1943. 79 p. 

Zareh Melkonian. Terdchankutiun. Kertvadzner, 1947-1950 [Happiness. Essays]. Beirut, 
Lebanon, Der Sahagian Press, 1950. 143 p. Publication of Ani monthly, no. 2. $1.00. 
Levon Mesrop. Kakhardogh Lire yev Nergaghtogh Dsin [The Bewitching Mountain and the 
Repartriating Horse]. Paris, B. Elekian Press, 1949. 396 p. 550 franks, or 20 shillings, 
or $2.50. 
N. N. Miklukho-Makla. Djanaparhordoutiunner [Journeys]. Translated by S. Soukiasian. 
Yerevan, Hai-pet-hrat, Division of Youth and Children's Literature, 1950. 399 p. 
Illustrations by V. Milashevski. 

(To be continued) 


The Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem 

A Photographic Study 

By the Very Reverend Serovpe Manoukian 

Dean of the Armenian Seminary in Jerusalem 


(See note on page [242] of this pictorial supplement) 

The Armenian Patriarchate of Jerusalem has a history of more than fifteen 
hundred years. Throughout this period it has enjoyed equal rights in the ownership 
of the Holy Places with the Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches. 

During these centuries the city of Jerusalem has seen the rule of the Romans, 
the Byzantines, the Arabs, the Crusaders, the Ottoman Turks, the British, and at 
present of the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. As each 
successive rule has given way to the other, as a result of wars, invasions and revolu- 
tions, the Armenian and the other religious communities in the city have been 
subjected to uncertainty as to their rights and properties. 

The recent termination of the British mandate over Palestine and the conflict 
which followed between Arabs and Jews for its possession, have not been an excep- 
tion to this historic pattern. The resulting present unnatural situation of Jerusalem 
and the uncertainties concerning the future of its administration are responsible for 
the state of flux of the Armenian and the other patriarchates of the city, especially as 
regards their status and their economic interests. 

*As a complement to this photographic study will appear in a later issue of Armenian 
Affairs a brief history of the Patriarchate by Serovpe Vardapet. The pictures in this section 

(Continued on last page) 

The Cathedral of St. James is built on the site of the house of St. James, the 
brother of Our Lord and the first bishop of Jerusalem. The throne to the left in the 
picture surmounted by an onion-shaped cupola represents St. James' Throne. The 
modest throne to the right, below, is the one ordinarily used by the Patriarch. St. 
James' Throne is an object of reverence. Once a year, on the occasion of the feast of 
St. James, His Beatitude the Patriarch ascends this apostolic chair, and remains there 
from the "Gloria in Excelsis" to the end of the service, at the conclusion of which he 
receives the obeisances of the Brotherhood with the ceremonial kissing of his hand. 
The only other time this ceremony is repeated is on the occasion of the enthronement 
of a new Patriarch. 


In the 1640's Catholicos Philippus Agh- 
baketsi visited Jerusalem, when he had 
the entire chancel decorated with beau- 
tiful mosaics, while the front of the 
bema (the elevation at the end of the 
chancel) with frescoes of Persian style. 
Both are works of exceptional taste and 
delicate artistry, which have been skil- 
fully blended with the porcelain walls, 
old paintings and gilt altars of the 


The residence of Annas, the highpriest 
of the time of Christ, where Jesus was 
taken and imprisoned for a while. The 
olive tree to which our Lord was bound 
and beaten with stripes still exists, for 
which reason the natives call it Der-el- 
Zeitoun [Monastery of the Olive-tree]. 
It is the parish church of the Armenians 
in Jerusalem; and within the walls of 
its grounds live more than fifteen Sisters 
of the Monastery. 



The principal altar of St. James Cathedral, exquisite in beauty and grandeur, decorated 
with carvings in hardwood, and gilded throughout, the work of the great Patriarch, 

Sheghtayakir, in 1750, 


The Chapel is built within the south wall of the Cathedral. To the left is the entrance 
that leads to the Chapel of St. Minass, where the vestments and other treasures of the 
Monastery are kept. These two chapels are the oldest parts of the Monastery. The 

door of the Chapel of Gelkha- 
dir is lavishly decorated with 
mother of pearl, and is a rare 
example of the best Oriental 
art of its kind. 



Christmas is celebrated in Jerusalem 
on January 6, according to the old 
calendar, (Jan. 19 according to the 
nev\^ calendar.) The day before, at ten 
o'clock, the great bell of St. James 
Cathedral in Jerusalem peals, and the 
entire Brotherhood starts for Bethle- 
hem in an immense procession of car- 
riages, led by six armed gendarmes, in 
honor of the Patriarch, who is re- 
ceived at the public square in Bethle- 
hem by a large multitude and govern- 
ment ofhcials. 

The picture represents the proces- 
sion in 1950, met by the Arab Legion. 

After the all-night service, the 
Brotherhood and the pilgrims return 
to Jerusalem in procession, 



%'r» •'^ ' 


f^s> r» • 


The class of deacons of the 
Patriarchate (1924-1930) who 
studied as beneficiaries of the 
five-year scholarships established 
by the late Badrig Gulbenkian. 
In the front row, center, is 
Patriarch Yeghishe Tourian; to 
his right is Bishop Papken, later 
Coadjutor Catholicos of Cilicia; 
to his left is Patriarch Mesrob, 
then dean of the Seminary of 
the Patriarchate; next to the 
latter is Canon Bridgeman of 
the Episcopal Church in America. 
In the middle of the second row 
is Patriarch Cyril II, then sub- 
dean of the Seminary. To his 
right is Bishop Sion; to whose 
right, Zgon Vardapet. The first 
deacon on the extreme left of 
the same row is the Very Rever- 
end Serovpe Manoukian, at 
present in the United States as 
Patriarchal Delegate to raise 
funds for the needy and 
the Armenian Patriarchate of 

', * : •; i 


Gold chalice of many colors, decorated by 

stippling. Gift of the Armenian colony in 

Egypt; work of Armenian goldsmiths of 


Diamond-studded gold chalice, with engrav- 
ings of scenes from the life of Christ. 


[•f - 



.,^3^^^^^- ■ 


^^^M^l. ^ 


■;%. ■ 


;■■ f6^* ■ 



•t;^i^^ ■:,;€•':■%: 

iM ''«^^"' 



One of the priceless embroidered hangings of the Chapel of Gelkhadir — two angels 
presenting the head of the Apostle St. James in a shroud, to the Mother of God. 
Gelkhadir is the tomb of the head of St. James, one of the Twelve, brother of John the 
Evangelist, and one of the sons of Zebedee. The two brothers were known as "The Sons 
of Thunder." James, who was beheaded by Herod in A.D. 44, was the first of the Apostles 
to be martyred. The faithful brought his head to Jerusalem and buried it in the home 
of James the Brother of Our Lord, the first bishop of Jerusalem. The latter was buried 
there, too. On the site of these two graves the Armenians later built the Cathdral 
which commemorates their names. The Chapel of Gelkhadir and the Tomb of 
Tyarneghbar, the brother of Our Lord, are within the Cathedral. The two James's are 
the patron saints of the Armenian Patriarcliate of Jerusalem, 

o >>S.S 


.^ ^ S ii; OJ 
i> (U K G -Q 

J !^ -r^ "'^ 

CI J^ 


o t^ 

w M r1 TJ 

s-i a; 


P tH 



In the center of the Church cf the Holy Sepulcher is the edicule built over the Tomb of 
Christ, then newly hewn in the rock from where Our Lord arose. A large marble slab is 
placed over the tomb. The interior as well as the exterior of the edicule is decorated with 
images and lamps by the three main religious communities — Greek, Latin, and 
Armenian — which are the custodians of the principal international Christian Holy 
Places. The order of daily celebrations of the liturgy in the edicule of the Tomb of 
Christ is established as follows: the Greek Liturgy from 1:00 to 3:00 A.M., the Armenian 
Liturgy from 3:00 to 5:00 A.M.. and the Latin Mass from 5:00 to 7:00 A.M. 


Soorp Astvadzamayr, in the valley of Gethsemane, where the Holy Virgin is buried, 
is the oldest and most imposing church edifice in Jerusalem, owned jointly by Armenians 
and Greeks. It is surrounded by the historic Garden of Gethsemane, part of which is 
the property of the Armenians, and the other part of the Greeks. 

On the tomb of the Virgin, which is in the center of the church, daily mass is said 
by the Armenians and the Greeks, according to their respective rites. The Armenian, 
mass is celebrated by a vardapet, a member of the celibate clergy with rank below that 
of bishop, who visits the church for the purpose, accompanied by choristers. 


Embroidered and pearl-studded bazpan 
(cuff) worn by celebrant of mass. The 
writing in Armenian at the lower end 
of the pair of bazpans states that it 
was made for the use of Patriarch 
Hovhannes in 1171, according to the 
Armenian calendar, or in A.D. 1723. 



The ceremony held on Easter eve, when all lights in 
the Church of the Holy Sepulcher are put out and 
thousands of the faithful meet at the sanctuary. The 
procession forms around the tomb of Christ, when 
an Armenian bishop and the Patriarch of thri 
Greeks enter the Holy Sepulcher with bundles of 
candles in their hands, which they light and give 
out as a symbol of the resurrection of Christ, after 
which starts the Armenian procession. The picture 
represents the overflow crowd from the sanctuary 
in the courtyard. 


Built within the walls of St. James Monastery by the Armenian King Leo, in 
memory of his son Toros, who suffered martyrdom in battle. It is a beautiful and 
lovely church, where four thousand Armenian illuminated manuscripts are kept. 

The Vardapet in the corner is the late Patriarch Cyril II, who was at one time 
the curator of this manuscript library. 

W J 

H O 


S H f« 

M a H 

g fo hJ 

g O t3 

O O 

O Gj 

T" r-t ^^ 

- > (U CO 

O be S 
^ o o P 

w i; _2 -IS 

"O -^ O tH 


CD fl 



W w c/3 " 

0) <U o <u 

-U -U O 4-3 

CU g CD S 

<U O <u o 

^ -9 13 n 

TJ O • O 

.^ w g3 Sh 

•r' OJ !D 

-i-i ^ -tJ |JL| 














































G "^ w : 
csj OJ o 

l> CD 4J 


^ g3 w 
d cy 


This is the Armenian Monastery, next to the Church of the Nativity in 
Bethlehem. Here hve three vardapets, choristers and lay members of the Brother- 
hood, as custodians of the rights of the Armenians, and conduct the dail,y 
services. In the picture are a number of the clergy and monastics. Within the 
walls of the Monastery is a separate Armenian church, and accommodations 
for pilgrims. 

The Vardapet in the center of the picture who wears a cross is the great hero 
of Zeitoun, the mountain fastness in Cilicia where the native Armenians success- 
fully resisted the Turkish armies for a long time, until the tragic days of the 
first world war. 


The spacious, beautiful hall built by Patriarch Hovhannes Ismirtsi, decorated with the 
paintings of Armenian Patriarclis and the autographed pictures of European royalty 
and other dignitaries. The pictures were presented on the occasion of visits and other 
historic circumstances. The pictures across the hall ai'e those of King George V and 
Queen Max'y of England, presented in 1929 on the occasion of the jubilee of Patriarch 

Yeghishe Tourian. 

f I 


St. Stephen's Day is the great day of the deacons. On that occasion 

they put on their most elaborate vestments and conduct all the 

church services. The fifth from the right is Bishop Tiran, primate 

of the Armenian Church in North America. 


Old Armenian style khatchkar, inset in the wall of 
the Court of St. James Cathedral. A khatchkar is a 
slender, flagstone or stone slab, on which is executed 
decorative crosses by sculpture, and which is placed at 
shrines and on the tombs of notable people. The 
exterior and interior walls of churches in Jerusalem 
are decorated with similar khatchkars by the pious. 
Frequently the inscriptions on these stones are of 
great historic value. The artistic skill which they 
represent is sometimes of the highest quality. 

(Continued from page [229] of this pictorial 

Diamond-studded and embroidered miter, vakas 
(collar worn by the Patriarch while officiating at 
mass) and artakhurak (headband of the same) of 
Patriarch Grigor Sheghtayakir (The Chain-bearer) . 
In the 1700's, in the days of this Patriarch, the Ar- 
menian Monastery in Jerusalem was under Moslem 
rule. At that time the Monastery was in dire financial 
distress and the church vestments were left in secur- 
ity against debts. 

Patriarch Sheghtayakir, wearing an iron chain to 
symbolize the plight of the Monastery, visited the 
Armenian settlements everywhere to raise money for 
the Monastery. After meeting all the debts and 
redeeming the church vestments he repaired and 
further embellished the monastery and the church 
edifices with new gifts. 

The present splendid condition of St. James Cathe- 
dral is the fruit of his painstaking effort and delica.te 
taste. His chain is preserved to this day in the 

I'S^n :• 


The ancient and impressive entrance 
to the Monastery opens on Armenian 
Street. The thick heavy iron gate 
is closed at nightfall, in keeping with 
the rules of the Monastery, and the 
keys are delivered to the Patriarch, 
who returns them when the doors 
are to open at the ringing of the 
church bell at daybreak. 


The Court of St. James 
Cathedral, which in the past 
has served as the mausoleum 
of Patriarchs; and the main 
entrance leading into the 


of the 

Armenia Reborn. By Charles A. Vertanes with an mtroducnon by 
Robert W. Searle. Armenian National Council of America, N. Y., 1947. 
216 p. Cloth. 8 vo. Illustrated. Topical bibliography. Appendices. Map. 
Index. $3.00. 

Armenia Reborn contains a brief history of the Armenian people since 
Sumerian times; a survey of the Armenian Question from the Treaty of 
San Stefano to the Treaty of Lausanne; a detailed description of the 
achievements of the Armenian Republic since 1920; a discussion of the 
present status of the Armenian Question and of current efforts in its behalf. 
Highly recommended by church and lay leaders, including Bishop Noel Porter, 
Frederick L. Fagley, J. M. Dawson and L. P. Chambers. Pierre Van Paassen 
characterizes it as : "highly informative and brilliantly written . . . invaluable 
in an understanding of the situation in a very inflammable corner of the Near Easr 
... a distinct service to the Armenian people and to the triumph of justice in 

The Plea of the Little People. By Dr. F. L. Fagley^ 4 p. Free. 
The Armenian Crisis, 1912-1914. By Roderig H. Davison^ re- 

printetd from the American Historical Review. 25 p. 15c. 
The Beginnings of Genocide. By Joseph Guttman, 19 p. 10c. 
An Appeal to the UN by the World Armenian Congress. 

1947, 11 p. 25c. 
Memorandum on the Proposed Aid to Greece and Turkey. 

Presented to the Government of the U. S. by the A.N.C.A., March, 1947, 

5 p. 15c. 
A Memorandum on the Armenian Question. Presented to the 

Council of Foreign Ministers, March 7, 1947. 22 p. 25c. 
At the Foot of Ararat. By Hewlett Johnson^ Dean of Canterbury, 

25 p. 15c. 
Armenian Exhibit and Festival, 1949. With colored plates of 

Terlemezian's Ararat and scene from the Battle of Vartanantz, 4 p. 15c. 
Teghekatoo. Monthly bulletin (in Armenian) of the Armenian National 

Council of America, No. 1, June 1, 1949 to date. Subscription: $1.00 per 



Armenian Folk Tales. Text by I. Khatchatriantz. Illustrations by 
Martyros Saryan, with an introduction by Charles A. Vertanes. Colonial 
House, Philadelphia, 1946. 141 p. Cloth. 8 vo. $2.00. 

Armenian Folk Tales "is unquestionably a contribution to both Enghsh children's 
literature and English folk literature." — from the Introduction. 
Armenia and the Byzantine Empire. By Sirarpie Der Nersessian. 

Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1947. 141 p. $3.00. 
20,000 Clergymen for Armenia. Al Report of the Deputation of the 
American Church Committee for Armenia to the U. S. Department of 
State. 15c. 
A Petition from the American Clergy on Behalf of the Armen- 
ian Cause. The American Church Committee for Armenia, 4 p. Fr-ee. 


144 E. 24th Street, New York 10, N. Y.